Sample Movie Review Paper on Becky Lynn vs producers of Girls Gone Wild

Becky Lynn vs producers of Girls Gone Wild

Girls Gone Wild (GGW) is an infamous late-night peddler of college girls exposing their breasts and removing their panties. While the experience at the GGW is surely one to remember, girls who go wild for the camera during the event must be ready to deal with the outcomes when the tequila wears off and their captions used for advertisements and campaigns.

A woman who exposed her breasts at Mardi Gras and got worldwide exposure has sued the producers of Girls Gone Wild (GGW) videos for intrusion of her privacy by using her images without her consent.  Becky Lynn Gritzke, a business major at the Florida State University contends in her lawsuit that she was among the women who removed their tops at the Mardi Gras event last year in trade for trinkets and beads. Barely a month later, Becky was shocked to realize that not only did her pictures and videos appear in a series of videos of women baring their bodies but also premiered I the TV and website. Consequently, Becky suffered humiliation, embarrassment, suffering, and mental pain and the invasion to her privacy instills permanent suffering even in the future because of the video and its advertisements.

However, the production company replied to the motion dismissing the claims. The producers of GGW defend that the complainant inappropriately invoked the law of Florida because neither the making of the video or the Mardi Gras celebration happened at the scene. The defendant maintain that the videotapes and the advertisements are noncommercial production entitled to comprehensive First Amendment; thus, Florida law cannot be decoded to prohibit them. Further, the defendant claims there is no expectation of privacy at such public events like Mardi Gras, which have got thousands of followers watching.

Although it is not easy to sue GGW, communication proponents allude that producers must be cognizant with the four privacy invasions that plaintiffs must try to prove. One privacy invasion involves publication of true but embarrassing facts. A second one involves intrusion. A third privacy torts is false light. The fourth tort is misappropriation. The misappropriation tort allows one to protect their persona, image, and voice from commercial application for profits without consent. Becky sue GGW for all four torts claiming that she has a reasonable expectation for privacy and that her likeness was distorted since she is not that kind of girl portrayed in the video series. She defends that she was flashing for her boyfriend.

From a law perspective, Gritzke would be able to prove the misappropriation tort since Girls Gone Wild put her on TV ads and billboards despite not getting any kind of permission, verbal or written. Under the misappropriation tort, implicit consent or acting out for captions without knowing where they will feature is not adequate. Using one’s images in such productions calls for some kind of contractual agreement.  If Gritzke had issued verbal consent, she would have no case to pursue since it is binding, even in impaired judgement due to intoxication.

While the business major student, Becky Lynn Gritzke challenges that MRA Holding LLC intruded her privacy by marketing her images flashing during Mardi Gras in New Orlean, the video company defends that the event was newsworthy and that people who remove their clothes in public during the event forfeit their right to privacy. Nonetheless, Becky is justified to seek for damages following the embarrassment and suffering as well s what may be termed unjust enrichment of the video company due to the unauthorized use of her image.