http://www.law.com/jsp/article.jsp?id=1205923904352
Here is an interesting article from Law.com that explains a libel lawsuit filed against the creators of Law & Order by a lawyer in NYC. The lawyer claims that in the episode titled "Floater", the lawyer depicted in the show is him and that the show was damaging his image/reputation.
To make matters even more interesting and twisted, during the course of the episode the detectives uncover a corruption scandle involving the attorney and a judge. The plaintiff here was alledged (but never proven) to be part of a bribing scandle involving judges in the NY area. Due to the amount of coverage this scandle received, the judge deemed the plaintiff a "public figure".
While there are multiple similarities between the lawyer in the episode and the plaintiff, he will still need to prove that the audience believed that the character portrayed in the episode was in fact him and not a fictional character.
Question being: If he has to prove the audience believes that this character was him, are we referring to the nationwide audience or just the NY audience? If we are talking about the nationwide audience, I think it would be extremely difficult for him to prove that this character was in fact him.
It is my opinion that the plaintiff in this case is going to have a difficult time proving that the lawyer decpicted in this particular episode was in fact him. While there are many similarities between the character and the plaintiff, I find it hard to believe that the majority of Law & Order viewers would make the association if they were not following the press regarding the scandle that he was linked to. Feel free to let me know your thoughts.
Chrissy
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
2 comments:
It would seem that the suit would only hold up in NY. If NY is where his livelihood and reputation are being damaged, that is where he should file for damages. And if the average New Yorker viewing Law & Order made a direct link to the actual story, he may have a chance - right?
Law & Order is famous for its “ripped from the headline” storylines. With that in mind, I could see how the lawyer could seem to be libeled. There also seems to be a lot of similarities between the Law & Order character and the lawyer. I could see how people in Manhattan could think that the storyline reflected the plaintiff. However, as a public figure he will have a much harder case to prove. So, do most reasonable people know that Law & Order is fictional?
Post a Comment