Prosser's Four Privacy Torts

Video Activity
Join over 3 million cybersecurity professionals advancing their career
Sign up with
Required fields are marked with an *
or

Already have an account? Sign In »

Time
7 hours 2 minutes
Difficulty
Intermediate
CEU/CPE
7
Video Transcription
00:00
>> Hey, everyone, it's Chris again,
00:00
and I'm Cybrary's instructor for
00:00
its US Information Privacy course.
00:00
It's always a pleasure to be here
00:00
>> with you to talk about
00:00
>> important privacy topics and concepts.
00:00
We're going to close out Module 1 looking at
00:00
William Prosser's contributions to
00:00
privacy law in the United States,
00:00
how he helped influence and shape
00:00
the development of American law of tort privacy.
00:00
Before I can begin this discussion, though,
00:00
I have to give credit to
00:00
the outstanding article written by Neil Richardson,
00:00
Daniel Solove entitled
00:00
>> Prosser's Privacy Law: A Mixed Legacy,
00:00
>> which is a fascinating article.
00:00
It looks at William Prosser,
00:00
who was one of America's leading legal theorists over
00:00
his lifetime up until his passing in 1972.
00:00
But it's a great article because
00:00
it helps us as privacy professionals
00:00
understand how privacy torts evolved over time.
00:00
We still see those here,
00:00
the challenges that are posed
00:00
>> by the media, social media.
00:00
>> We saw as we looked at
00:00
the article or the essay written
00:00
>> by Warren and Brandeis,
00:00
>> The Intrusive Nature of the Media,
00:00
technological advances that create
00:00
a [inaudible] privacy harms,
00:00
privacy invasions and then the
00:00
really high bar that's been set in the courts here
00:00
in the United States really for plaintiffs
00:00
to receive redress under the law.
00:00
Now we've seen that over time the US government
00:00
itself has passed rules, regulations,
00:00
and laws in the case of
00:00
the telemarketing sales rule that's
00:00
administered by the Federal Trade Commission that
00:00
lowers these bars and allows American citizens that
00:00
have invasions and harms caused by intrusion,
00:00
cleanse occlusion created by telemarketers,
00:00
direct marketers and sales into their lives.
00:00
The ability to use that rule to address
00:00
those privacy harms is a little easier
00:00
for American citizens then.
00:00
They'd find under other laws here in the United States.
00:00
We have several learning objectives.
00:00
We're going to look at Prosser's views
00:00
on Privacy Tort Law.
00:00
Then we're going to have a brief discussion on
00:00
those four privacy torts that I want you
00:00
to be familiar with as
00:00
>> information privacy practitioners.
00:00
>> As I stated earlier,
00:00
I encourage you to read
00:00
Richard's and Solove's essay or
00:00
article published and available online.
00:00
It was published in 2010,
00:00
the California Law Review.
00:00
It does an exceptional job of offering
00:00
a balanced and objective analysis of
00:00
William Prosser's contributions and
00:00
impacts on privacy tort law here in the United States.
00:00
It's critical at times, but again,
00:00
I think that it offers a balanced view of
00:00
that impact and while some of the challenges that
00:00
we still face here in American courts when it comes
00:00
to addressing privacy harms
00:00
and privacy invasions under the law.
00:00
William Prosser in 1960,
00:00
published his landmark article
00:00
entitled Privacy in the California Law Review.
00:00
That article itself builds upon
00:00
the Warren and Brandeis
00:00
article entitled The Right to Privacy.
00:00
But he looks at privacy as it's evolved over
00:00
those 50 or so years since
00:00
the publication of that landmark essay.
00:00
He looks at the impact of privacy as it applies
00:00
to the protections under the law from
00:00
privacy harms, privacy invasions.
00:00
Where Brandeis and Warren
00:00
looked at shortfalls under common law as they
00:00
applied to privacy protections and
00:00
they propose one privacy tort.
00:00
It's Prosser who expanded the scope of
00:00
that privacy tort to
00:00
four privacy torts that are [inaudible] due today.
00:00
Now those for privacy torts are
00:00
intrusion upon the plaintiff's occlusion or solitude,
00:00
or into his private affairs.
00:00
The public disclosure of
00:00
embarrassing private facts about the plaintiff,
00:00
publicity which places the plaintiff
00:00
in a false light in the public eye.
00:00
We're talking about their defamation law,
00:00
casting someone in a false light, slander and libel.
00:00
Then there are appropriation for the defendants
00:00
advantage of the plaintiff's name or likeness.
00:00
Uses someone's image or
00:00
their name really for financial gain without consent.
00:00
Now, although these four privacy torts
00:00
are attributed to William Prosser,
00:00
he had concerns that this additional focus on
00:00
these privacy torts might
00:00
distract from traditional common law,
00:00
especially as it applied to defamation law.
00:00
The courts themselves have looked the process
00:00
were continuously since the publication
00:00
of this essay when
00:00
considering privacy related court cases.
00:00
Again, I encourage you to read Privacy.
00:00
I also encourage you to read
00:00
Solove and Richard's article.
00:00
It'll give you greater insights into
00:00
Prosser's intent and the way
00:00
course they view privacy towards.
00:00
We've seen that it's extremely difficult,
00:00
just like Brandeis in Warren stated in their essay,
00:00
for plaintiffs themselves to
00:00
prove privacy harms, privacy invasions,
00:00
unless we're talking about things like
00:00
data breaches that can provide some type of
00:00
tangible evidence that some level of harm has been
00:00
caused and
00:00
results in a privacy invasion
00:00
or privacy harm of the individual
00:00
is still an American court
00:00
today is a very high bar to attain
00:00
when trying to receive or
00:00
>> achieve redress under the law.
00:00
>> Especially when it comes to
00:00
the intrusive nature of the media, paparazzi,
00:00
social media publications of personal information,
00:00
and of the like, advances in technology.
00:00
I hope you enjoyed our discussion.
00:00
As always, we're going to have a series of
00:00
questions associated with each lesson.
00:00
This question asks,
00:00
which landmark essay did Prosser
00:00
publish in the California Law Review in 1960.
00:00
But you don't have to know the date.
00:00
The appropriate answer would be A.
00:00
Question 2 asks,
00:00
which privacy tort addresses defamation?
00:00
Libel and slander, casting someone in a false light?
00:00
That would be C. Question 3 asks the question,
00:00
which privacy tort addresses
00:00
using someone's likeness without consent?
00:00
The appropriate answer would be D. In summary,
00:00
William Prosser's work in
00:00
his article entitled Privacy
00:00
>> really builds upon the work
00:00
>> accomplished by Brandeis and
00:00
Warren in their landmark essay entitled,
00:00
The Right to Privacy.
00:00
Now although he expanded upon the scope of
00:00
that essay and he identifies four privacy torts,
00:00
we have to remember that Prosser also
00:00
was extremely concerned about
00:00
the impact of these privacy torts on
00:00
existing law, specifically defamation law.
Up Next