It’s never good
to see that someone has used your picture without your consent. Seeing an
unwanted picture can cause stress whether it’s an embarrassing Facebook tag or,
in the extreme case of Michigan State University student Maggie, for
advertising purposes. In the case study of “Maggie,” Jim Ridolfo and Martine
Courant Rife attempt to touch on some of the ethical and legal concerns
associated with the unwanted use of a person’s image or likeness. The case can
be viewed as harrowing from many perspectives. Ridolfo and Rife highlight the
many problems that this case study suggests, first and foremost being a large
entity’s sheer ability to use a person’s likeness and go uncontested.
Ridolfo and Rife
explain to extent that this action of using an unapproved image is one that
would have probably been quickly contested if a smaller organization or an
individual had been the one in question (232). This case study is centered on
Michigan State University as an entity. A university is a multi-million dollar
organization. There’s a power and an ability to defend itself far more than a
person may be able to do. Ridolfo and Rife also mention that this is a
situation where the photo isn’t only wrong in use, but wrong in context. Maggie
was participating in a protest and her image is used as advertising for the
school.
Within the
school’s ability to do something like this and remix a photo without public pushback,
several other ethical problems arise. The argument of privacy is especially
relevant in this case study considering the usage of a young girl’s likeness
without consent. Ridolfo and Rife take issue with this. They explain that
privacy should be one of the main critical issues that the university should’ve
considered (231). Unfortunately, they explain that her knowledge of the
photographer’s presence led to a low expectation of privacy, which makes it
hard for Maggie to defend herself and her argument. The photograph directly
conflicts with Maggie’s privacy in her protest (231). There’s a consideration
for her cause that the university must consider and keep in mind.
Ridolfo, Jim, and Martine Courant Rife. “Rhetorical Velocity and Copyright: A Case Study on Strategies
of Rhetorical Delivery.” Copy(write): Intellectual Property in the Writing Classroom. Ed. Martine
Courant Rife, Shaun Slattery, and Dànielle Nicole De Voss. Fort Collins, CO: WAC
Clearinghouse and Parlor P, 2011. Web. http://wac.colostate.edu/books/copywrite/.
Good post Kiernan, I must wholeheartedly agree with you. Privacy is the main concern here, although I think that the usage of a photo without consent is rather difficult to clearly define and charge with ethical implications, until there can be a case made for why using the image and likeness should negatively impact the non-consenting party. Even if there were a clearly definable gain made on part of the organization using the image, I don't see how that gain could cause material harm. Capitalizing on an image might reach into something unethical, even so, only slightly. Even so, the matter of whether that should approach a legal issue must involve some material or quantifiable harm. Although, to capitalize on her image without consent may be argued that she did not receive justice in form of at least a portion of gain made by using her image and likeness. Then this begs the question of whether it is unjust, or that the party has due rights to gains made by them without consent.
ReplyDelete