Results 1 to 10 of 10

Thread: Steven Tyler Act

  1. #1
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Location
    Honolulu
    Posts
    3,596

    Default Steven Tyler Act



    The “Steven Tyler Act,” introduced at Tyler’s request by Sen. Kalani English, D-Maui, makes it a civil tort to “capture or intend to capture, in a manner that is offensive to a reasonable person, through any means a visual image, sound recording, or other physical impression of another person while that person is engaging in a personal or familial activity with a reasonable expectation of privacy.”



    " ’ENOUGH IS ENOUGH’

    Tyler and Fleetwood, the British drummer for Fleetwood Mac, own homes on Maui. Tyler recently purchased a $4.8 million beachfront house. Fleetwood made Maui his permanent residence 10 years ago and, in August, entered the restaurant business, with Fleetwood’s on Front Street.

    Both said they have been harassed while on their private property by paparazzi, including some who have cameras that can take high-resolution photos from up to a mile away."




    What do you folks think about this proposed bill?


    *Photos courtesy of StarAdvertiser.com
    Last edited by Pomai; February 9th, 2013 at 12:28 PM. Reason: text and photo formatting

  2. #2
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    Waimanalo
    Posts
    771

    Default Re: Steven Tyler Act

    Quote Originally Posted by Pomai View Post
    Both said they have been harassed while on their private property by paparazzi, including some who have cameras that can take high-resolution photos from up to a mile away."

    What do you folks think about this proposed bill?
    It's a terrible idea. How is it "harrassment" to take a photo from a mile away? Anyhow, the press is protected under the Constitution, so the bill is probably unconstitutional. And if not, by court precedents limiting the rights of celebrities to prevent public slander. I wish Tyler could have more privacy here, but he should remember that he lives in a free society.
    Greg

  3. #3
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Location
    Honolulu
    Posts
    3,596

    Default Re: Steven Tyler Act

    The interesting thing is, Mr. Tyler is proposing the bill here in Hawaii - and specifically of interest to him on Maui of all places - and not in California, where Paparazzi are much more notorious.

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Location
    Wah-key'-key
    Posts
    10,390

    Default Re: Steven Tyler Act

    It appears to me that the bill is directly aimed at the paparazzi altho' how can it be limited to just the paparazzi! I watched the news coverage last night and all these 2 celebs want is privacy within the confines of the property they rent or own. Even Tyler admitted that "public" means "public" and he understands and accepts that. His example was the pap. who, with a very long lens and quite a distance away, got and sold a shot of Tyler brushing his teeth in his own bathroom. I'm with the celebs on this one. The pap. cross way too many lines.

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    Wailuku, HI
    Posts
    90

    Default Re: Steven Tyler Act

    Quote Originally Posted by tutusue View Post
    I'm with the celebs on this one.
    I am, too.

    I believe the current bill before the Hawaii legislature closely mirrors California law on the issue.

  6. #6
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Location
    Smokin' in da windward crib
    Posts
    6,721

    Default Re: Steven Tyler Act

    Yes, and New York also has a similar law. I'm with the celebs on this one too. Especially since the Princess Diana situation.
    It's not unusual for some of the paps to sneak onto celebs private property to get photos. Sometimes they get arrested for trespassing and the celebs can get restraining orders against them.
    The bad/sad/mad news is that the paps get really big $$ for those photos because so darned many people buy the tabloids and want to see them.
    And on those photos in post #1 here, it's sad to see Mick Fleetwood having hearing problems in two of the photos, but it's funny that in the very first photo Steven Tyler seems to be indicating the size of his... you know.
    .
    .

    That's my story, and I'm sticking to it.

  7. #7
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    Waimanalo
    Posts
    771

    Default Re: Steven Tyler Act

    Quote Originally Posted by DaleP View Post
    I am, too.

    I believe the current bill before the Hawaii legislature closely mirrors California law on the issue.
    It does -- specifically Cal. Civ. Code 1708.8(b)*. Here is the conclusion of a lawyer's discussion:
    The anti-paparazzi laws appear to be the result of an emotional reaction to a tragic event. They ignore the fact that existing laws have long protected against "abuses" by the media, leaving the new legislation unnecessary and likely unconstitutional. Nevertheless, only time will tell whether the anti-paparazzi laws withstand constitutional scrutiny.
    http://apps.americanbar.org/forums/c...um99boese.html
    So far, I haven't found any mention of an interesting court test of 1708.8(b). I have seen reference to a case brought by Barbra Streisand, but it clearly didn't fall under the statute (and hence it failed).

    *1708.8(b)
    A person is liable for constructive invasion of privacy when
    the defendant attempts to capture, in a manner that is offensive to a
    reasonable person, any type of visual image, sound recording, or
    other physical impression of the plaintiff engaging in a personal or
    familial activity under circumstances in which the plaintiff had a
    reasonable expectation of privacy, through the use of a visual or
    auditory enhancing device, regardless of whether there is a physical
    trespass, if this image, sound recording, or other physical
    impression could not have been achieved without a trespass unless the
    visual or auditory enhancing device was used.
    Last edited by GregLee; February 9th, 2013 at 07:01 PM.
    Greg

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    Kahalu`u Stream
    Posts
    2,933

    Default Re: Steven Tyler Act

    Where does privacy and freedom of speech meet?

    Who holds the cards?

    Paparrazzi are free to violate privacy, but citizens must submit themseles?

    Let's all go out naked on May 1 2013, to show our support for privacy.
    Be Yourself. Everyone Else Is Taken!
    ~ ~
    Kaʻonohiʻulaʻokahōkūmiomioʻehiku
    Spreading the virus of ALOHA.
    Oh Chu. If only you could have seen what I've seen, with your eyes.

  9. #9

    Default Re: Steven Tyler Act

    Steven has not been happy since the photos of him in speedos while on Maui hit the papers.
    Now run along and play, but donít get into trouble.

  10. #10

    Default Re: Steven Tyler Act

    Quote Originally Posted by LikaNui View Post
    but it's funny that in the very first photo Steven Tyler seems to be indicating the size of his... you know.
    The size of his Bill?

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •