From: awells@jarthur.claremont.edu (Adam "Servo" Wells)
Subject: Re: Virtual Ethics
Organization: Harvey Mudd College, Claremont, CA 91711
Date: Mon, 6 Apr 1992 21:46:59 GMT

In article <1992Apr5.164737.16759@yang.earlham.edu> allens@yang.earlham.edu (Allen Smith) writes:
>In article <1992Apr2.031058.19303@reed.edu>, mehawk@reed.edu (Michael Sandy) writes:
>> 
>> How would you react to someone using a simulation of you in their
>> Virtual fantasy?  What if they did various non-consensual type stuff
>> with that copy?
>> And no royalties! ;^)
>	That's an interesting point. Should people have copyrights over 
>their appearance, etc? I'd say yes. Just as someone shouldn't be able to 
>find out/use my grades, etc. without my permission, they shouldn't be able 
>to use my appearance without my permission. Of course, at some point this 
>runs into freedom of the press- being able to print a photo of someone.

Anyone read _The Straight Dope_ by Cecil Adams (the bible of alt.folklore.
urban)?  He takes up an issue similar to this ... that of using someone's 
name.  A question he answers is, "How much right does a person have to his
name?"  The example cited is Sandburg Village in Chicago -- would Carl Sand-
burg have been able to veto this idea; would the developers need his
permission?

Adams answers that this is a matter of the right to privacy.  However, this
is a murky area in the law -- "A public figure, according to several
rulings, has far less of a right to privacy than your ordinary schlub."  He
mentions that names are in the public domain; you can name your kid
Coca-cola if you want to and no one can do anything.  But, "it could be
argued that Carl Sandburg had achieved such a extraordinary degree of fame
that his name was no longer 'his' -- that, in effect, he had no more privacy
left to be invaded, and so could suffer no damage from the use of his
moniker."

It seems to me that this argument could be extended to faces or
representations of people.  How much right do I have to my picture?  Can I
stop anyone from using it?  Sure, if they print it with a false caption, or
create a retouched photo of something that I did not do, I could sue for
libel (does a printed picture count as libel?).  But, if I create a
retouched photo of a nude Vanna White, fantasize about it, even masturbate
with it, but show it to no one, is it illegal?  I think not.  If I write a
story in which I kill the president and rape his wife, but keep it for
myself, no action can be taken against me.

So if I create a virtual world where Vanna is my sex slave, and I kill Bush
every day, but it's all mine and no one else can see it, what's the problem?
If I publish my 'simsense' production, of course these people could take
action against me.  

But back to my original point.  mehawk@reed.edu is correct that it is a
freedom of speech issue.  Currently, you have freedom of speech ... just
don't slander or libel anyone (or get into obscenity trouble).  If you want to 
produce your new screenplay using your super video-editing computer, and
star Michael J. Fox and Winona Ryder in it, without consulting them, I don't
think that it would be illegal.  That is, unless, they felt that the sex
scene was something that damaged their reputations.  Then they could sue you
for ... uh, virtual slander.  Since they are public figures, we are allowed
to put them in our movie, as long as it's not slanderous.  However, if you 
starred your nobody of a next door neighbor in it, and she didn't want to be 
nationally known when you release it, she could sue you for invasion of her 
privacy.

+---------------------------------+-------------------------------------------+
|  Adam B. Wells                  |  Harvey Mudd College, Claremont, CA       |
|  awells@jarthur.claremont.edu   |  "I'm too sexy for my .sig ..."           |
+---------------------------------+-------------------------------------------+