Some people need to smarten up and start rooting for the right team.
Posted on 06/01/2005 9:33:24 PM PDT by NormsRevenge
SAN DIEGO - A federal judge heard arguments Wednesday on The Associated Press' request to dismiss a lawsuit that claims the wire service violated copyright and privacy laws by publishing photos of Navy SEALs and Iraqi prisoners that an AP reporter discovered on the Internet.
Lawyers for the AP asked U.S. District Court Judge Jeffrey Miller to throw out the case under a California law that allows quick dismissal of lawsuits that can be shown to stifle free speech.
Six Navy SEALs and the wives of two of the special forces members sued the AP in December in state court. A similar version of the suit was refiled in federal court in March, this time by five of the SEALs and one of the wives. Since then, one of the SEALs has dropped out.
Plaintiffs' attorney James Huston said the press typically invokes the state's free-speech law when facing a suit.
"This is not a bogus suit," Huston said outside court. "We are not trying to intimidate the press."
Fifteen photos were distributed worldwide, along with a story, on Dec. 3. The photos appear to show servicemen in Iraq sitting on hooded and handcuffed detainees, as well as what look like bloodied prisoners, one with a gun to his head.
The plaintiffs contend the faces of the SEALs should have been obscured before being made available to the news cooperative's members. They are seeking unspecified damages as well as a court order banning the AP from further use of the photos and requiring that the news agency shield the SEALs' identities.
The AP argued that the case should be dismissed because the photos were newsworthy and the display of the SEALs faces was important because it showed their expressions.
Attorney David Schulz said the AP had no interest in "risking the lives of the SEALs or causing them harm. ... What this case is about is the right of the press to cover newsworthy information."
The judge didn't indicate when he would rule.
The AP reported that the images were found on a commercial photo-sharing Web site, Smugmug.com, and had been brought back from Iraq by the husband of a woman who kept them in an online photo album.
The initial story said the Navy had launched an investigation after being shown the images by an AP reporter. The wire service later reported that the Navy's preliminary findings showed most of the photos transmitted were taken for legitimate intelligence-gathering purposes and showed commandos using approved procedures.
Last week, a SEALs spokesman said that investigation is ongoing.
The SEALs' lawsuit claims the AP and the story's writer, San Diego reporter Seth Hettena, violated the privacy of the woman who posted the photos and the copyright of the photographer who took them by distributing them without permission.
The woman believed the nearly 1,800 photos she posted were password-protected from public access, according to the suit.
U.S. District Court Judge Jeffrey Miller
1997, Clinton appointee
Is (should) there be an expectation of privacy on the Net? Not in public forums of course...but what about "private" exchanges?
"The woman believed the nearly 1,800 photos she posted were password-protected from public access, according to the suit."
I guess this should be easy to answer. I assume since the article used the words "the woman believed" they were password protected that the photos were not password protected. But even if they were not password protected, the "owner" of the pictures has some legal right to how they are used. So the big question is , IMO , who owns the pictures?
If they are password-protected then there is a reasonable expectation of privacy. Much like the lock on your front door.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.