Subsequent Supreme Court decisions, however, left open the possibility that in cases involving private persons rather than public figures, states could permit false light recovery if plaintiffs merely proved negligence. Although the facts that give rise to a false light claim may also support a defamation claim, injury to reputation is not required for a false light claim. The false light tort aims primarily to protect against emotional distress rather than to protect ones reputation. First Amendment concerns, and the similarity between the claims, have persuaded some states not to recognize the false light tort. Misappropriation One who appropriates to his own use or benefit the name or likeness of another is subject to liability to the other for invasion of privacy.
States often have detailed statutes that govern the right of publicity.
Under these laws the use of a relevant picture to illustrate a newsworthy article will generally not lead to liability. The unauthorized use of a celebritys picture in an advertisement often will. Several defenses are available to photographers and news organizations accused of invasion of privacy. If the subject of the photograph has no reasonable expectation of privacy, then no invasion of privacy is possible. Photographs taken in public places generally are not actionable.