Article by Jon M. Garon
This Article focuses on the influence the entertainment industry and its business practices have had on copyright, privacy, and the First Amendment. The Article demonstrates that much of the modern development in the areas of privacy and copyright flow from the practical demands of the entertainment industry, and that the slow accession of free speech rights to traditional entertainment media has served to inhibit the tolerance for certain forms of expressive conduct. At each stage in the recognition and expansion of privacy law, the primary case law stemmed from performers and athletes attempting to control and to market their image. These cases, in turn, supported private individuals from claims of intrusion into seclusion, false light, and governmental intrusions into privacy. The copyright promotion of progress of science and the useful arts has tracked each state of growth in popular entertainment, revising the statute and social norms to promote the entertainment industries as they grow and mature. Finally, in the area of the First Amendment, the narrow but nearly inviolate protection of political speech has been eroded as other forms of speech and communication, primarily those of popular entertainment, have been added to the range of protected activities. As the breadth of free speech has expanded, so has the regulation of that speech. Modern regulation of television, radio, and advertising are not limited to select categories of speech, however, but allow government regulation and restraint of even the most highly prized core political speech. At the same time, free speech concerns have encouraged the voluntary censorship of media, creating a far more pervasive but unregulated tier of censorship. Although generally considered a sideshow in the legal arena, entertainment law has deeply shaped the political, legal, and economic reality that supports the development of the law.
About the Author
Jon M. Garon. Professor of Law, Franklin Pierce Law Center. B.A. University of Minnesota (Psychology and Theatre); J.D. Columbia Law School.
Citation
76 Tul. L. Rev. 559 (2002)