AustLII Home | Databases | WorldLII | Search | Feedback

Edited Legal Collections Data

You are here:  AustLII >> Databases >> Edited Legal Collections Data >> 2017 >> [2017] ELECD 309

Database Search | Name Search | Recent Articles | Noteup | LawCite | Help

Aplin, Tanya --- "Filling the IP gap: privacy and tabloidism" [2017] ELECD 309; in Richardson, Megan; Ricketson, Sam (eds), "Research Handbook on Intellectual Property in Media and Entertainment" (Edward Elgar Publishing, 2017) 400

Book Title: Research Handbook on Intellectual Property in Media and Entertainment

Editor(s): Richardson, Megan; Ricketson, Sam

Publisher: Edward Elgar Publishing

ISBN (hard cover): 9781784710781

Section: Chapter 15

Section Title: Filling the IP gap: privacy and tabloidism

Author(s): Aplin, Tanya

Number of pages: 25

Abstract/Description:

Tabloid journalism or ‘tabloidism’ in the United Kingdom has generated much controversy when it comes to privacy. One need only point to the Leveson Inquiry and subsequent Report to illustrate the propensity of UK tabloids to intrude upon the privacy of public figures and celebrities, along with ordinary individuals thrown into the public eye through tragedy, and the collective outrage this has caused. As the House of Lords held in Wainwright v Home Office, there is no general right to privacy under English law. To what extent, then, does intellectual property law fill this gap? In terms of ‘core’ intellectual property rights, the answer is ‘fairly marginally’. While copyright law can be relied upon to some degree, in relation to private letters or documents, this is only where the person seeking to protect their privacy interests is also the owner of copyright in the work. Moreover, copyright extends only to copying the particular expressive content in the work and not use of the underlying information or ideas that it contains. There is also a specific privacy right contained in the copyright legislation that exists for persons who have commissioned photographs and films for private and domestic purposes. Such persons have the ability to prevent copies of the work being exhibited in public, issued to the public or communicated to the public. However, this statutory privacy right is limited in important ways. It does not assist where photographs or films are taken surreptitiously or without being commissioned.


AustLII: Copyright Policy | Disclaimers | Privacy Policy | Feedback
URL: http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/journals/ELECD/2017/309.html