Wednesday, December 03, 2003
Streisand learns a bit about the 1st Amendment, and other tales from the Left
Nice work on the whole privacy thing . . . Got any other bright ideas?
New & Improved! Barbara Streisand's House: Now, with more 1st Amendment than ever before!
Photo Courtesy of California Coastline.org
We previously mocked several pompous organizations and individuals for their poor judgment in trying to suppress, censor or otherwise muzzle views they disagreed with. This included self-righteous fools on the Right, such as the fair and balanced Fox and their house blowhard Bill O'Reilly, as well as pompous asses on the Left, such as diva Barbara Streisand.
Our perspective was supported by a not one but two courts in the Fox cases, and has now been further validated in the Streisand litigation:
DECEMBER 3 2003 -- A Los Angeles judge today threw out Barbra Streisand's $10 million suit against a California environmental group that posted a photo of the singer's cliffside Malibu estate on its web site. In a 46-page tentative decision, the summary from which you'll find below, Superior Court Judge Allan J. Goodman declared that the aerial photo's publication was protected by the First Amendment and, to boot, was not "highly offensive to a reasonable person." Swatting away Streisand's claim that her privacy was violated, Goodman stated, "As a matter of law, there is nothing private or personal" about the photo, a copy of which you'll find at right. Making matters worse for the performer, Goodman indicated that he is ready to award legal fees to the California Coastal Records Project and the group's founder Kenneth Adelman, who snapped the image which so offended Babs.
TrackBack URL for this entry:
Listed below are links to weblogs that reference Streisand learns a bit about the 1st Amendment, and other tales from the Left:
The comments to this entry are closed.