Attorney Jonathan Peters offers pointers for staying out of trouble over invasion of privacy — filming in public places, entering private property, or recording phone calls: "If a person lives in Virginia but has a D.C. cell number and is on vacation in California, and she receives a call from a guy in Massachusetts and wants to record their conversation, which law applies? If there’s a conflict, the most prudent thing to do is comply with the most restrictive rule."
Law and journalism
Jonathan Peters covers copyright, fair use, and the legalities of linking and embedding: "Embedding copyrighted content may be okay, but screenshotting it and posting the screenshot is not. That’s basically the electronic equivalent of making a copy of the work, putting it squarely in the crosshairs of copyright law. So, if you find content on social media and want to use it (e.g., in an online news story), embedding is the safest way to do it — not screenshotting."
Bradlee Frazer discusses the two-pronged test for claiming the fair use exemption against charges of copyright infringement. But he also advises that the safest course is usually to get permission first: "Anytime you use any third-party content without permission (including quotes), you run the risk of getting sued. No amount of opining by me or another lawyer can change that fact. No one has to get permission from a judge or lawyer to sue you when you use their 'stuff.'"
Attorney Helen Sedwick surveys the landscape of libel law in the U.S. and provides some practical advice for writers who want to avoid its hazards. For example, she discusses the line between libelous and merely false: "Portraying someone as a jerk of a boyfriend, or an insulting mother-in-law, or an obnoxious boss is not defamation. The statement must 'tend to bring the subject into public hatred, ridicule, contempt, or negatively affect its business or occupation.'"