Can a teacher legally do this?

colton

The teacher isnt aloud to do that

judobigdog

The best thing for you to do is to remove it and offer an apology to the teacher.

If I publish a you tube video saying you are a member of NAMBLA (assuming its not true), do I have the right to do this?...

Yes and No. Yes I can do it...but the penalty is you can sue me for defamation of character and slander.

See where I am going with this......

Judobigdog

blondedude

in my country there was a case where pupil videorecorded a teacher doing karaoke on christmas party and putted to youtube.

the pupil had to pay 1600 euros to teacher and remove the video from youtube, after court order.

peppersham

She is right.You do not have the right to display anyones picture or information on the internet.She did not say it was ok to do so.You are wrong.

gaylene B

Actually, you could be sued for slander.

The basic elements of a claim of slander include;
a defamatory statement;
published to third parties; and
which the speaker or publisher knew or should have known was false.

http://definitions.uslegal.com/s/slander/

In practical terms - remove the offending page and post an apology. In other words, placate your teacher

â™¦Rasta Manâ™¦

You do have the right to publish things but you cannot slander. That means you can't publish something that isn't true.

danny14551

It is illegal and he could press charges, if he does you will get into trouble. Save yourself the hassle and take it down. Your first amendment right does not give you the right to slander anyone. Under your argument your teacher could post that you are racist, stupid, a rapist, etc and it would all be fine.

fdm215

It's not illegal to publish untrue things unless you have somehow damaged the reputation of the person. In this case, you were publishing an ALREADY published report. When the announcement went out over the radio - it was a published report. You can make a legitimate argument that you published it because your classmate was on the radio - not because it mentioned the teacher.

I doubt she has much of a case against you for publishing it. However, if she has TOLD you the information is false and you don't remove it...she might have a case for your continuing to publish false information about her.

pipppy

Whether or not you have rights to publish in this way is hardly the point.

The point is, you have been told to remove this by the person who has been publicly ridiculed, and the least you can do is apologise and comply with her demand. She never gave her consent to the publication and nor would she, so what about her rights? Do your perceived rights take precedence over hers? How arrogant.

Whether the matter violates anything legal isn't perhaps as important as not embarrassing said teacher. A little tact and decorum would have done much more to help preserve the teacher's dignity. Not too many people, in particular older women, like to have their ages advertised.
Even if you have rights to publish things, your teacher also has the right to be treated with dignity and respect.

robin_mauer

If they are not 70 you could be held liable for a defamation case or a false light case.

In law, defamation (also called vilification, slander, and libel) is the communication of a statement that makes a false claim, expressively stated or implied to be factual, that may give an individual, business, product, group, government or nation a negative image. Slander refers to a malicious, false, and defamatory statement or report, while libel refers to any other form of communication such as written words or images. Most jurisdictions allow legal actions, civil and/or criminal, to deter various kinds of defamation and retaliate against groundless criticism. Related to defamation is public disclosure of private facts which arises where one person reveals information which is not of public concern, and the release of which would offend a reasonable person.[1] "Unlike libel or slander, truth is not a defense for invasion of privacy."[2]

"False light" is a legal term that refers to a tort concerning privacy that is similar to the tort of defamation. The privacy laws in the United States include a non-public person's right to privacy from publicity which puts them in a false light to the public; which is balanced against the First Amendment right of free speech.

False light differs from defamation primarily in being intended "to protect the plaintiff's mental or emotional well-being" rather than protect a plaintiff's reputation as is the case with the tort of defamation[1] and in being about the impression created rather than being about true or false. If a publication of information is false, then a tort of defamation might have occurred. If that communication is not technically false but is still misleading then a tort of false light might have occurred.[1]

"False light privacy claims often arise under the same facts as defamation cases, and therefore not all states recognize false light actions. There is a subtle difference in the way courts view the legal theories -- false light cases are about damage to a person's personal feelings or dignity, whereas defamation is about damage to a person's reputation."[2]
"The specific elements of the Tort of FALSE LIGHT vary considerably even among those jurisdictions which do recognize this Tort. Generally, these elements consist of the following:

A publication by the Defendant about the Plaintiff;
made with actual malice (very similar to that type required by New York Times v. Sullivan in "Defamation" cases);
which places the Plaintiff in a false light; AND
that would be highly offensive (i.e., embarrassing to reasonable persons).[1]

This is from wikipedia.com, but it's not completely true. In order to have a false light claim you don't need to have malice.

Consequently, although actual malice is typically considered an essential element of a false light claim, some lower courts have found
some lesser degree of fault sufficient in false light cases.

As a result, a false light defendant â€“ unlike a defamation defendant â€“ â€œis not afforded an opportunity to correct an error by making a retraction; reporting privileges may or may not apply; the alleged false impression may be actionable even in the absence of malice; and the cause of action is governed by a longer statute of limitations.â€

This one of the differences between a false light and a defamation case. In a defamation case you can issue a retraction. In a false light case you do not have this opportunity; you can't unring a bell.

Take it off of the internet.

Greg M

its not illegal but it depends in what state your in

armychick_2001

It is against the law to publish untrue things. The teacher can sue your parents and you for it. You might be able to publish things freely as long as you have permission from any copyright owners and as long as what you publish is the truth.

Did you ask the radio station's permission before you published it, because radio stations usually have copyrights for everything they broadcast.

Did you ask the teacher if she would mind - and is she 70 years old.

Jordan G

The first amendment is : Freedom of religion, speech, press, petition, and assembly

Speech is defined as : Freedom of speech is being able to speak freely without censorship.

Censorship is: Censorship is the suppression of speech or deletion of communicative material which may be considered objectionable, harmful or sensitive, as determined by a censor.

So she can go cry a river leave it on youtube hell post it on your myspace if you remove it you let her win and she LEGALLY is not supposed to take your unalienated rights away.

oysterStar

It's funny how some people get about stuff like that. Your teacher would have to pass the libel/slander test for you to have to remove it. Does it defame her, or cost her financially because the video was made? Does it cause her provable emotional distress?

Just because it is not true, does not justify removing it. Look at how the Globe and The National Enquirer do their stuff. You can say funny things even if they are not true, and publish it.

eentweedrievier2007

Just tell her you your youtube account is slimjim98298, not whatever account it was. Jeez.

Burt C

Newspaper and magazine can publish anything as long as they have a certified source, which means if they ever are taken to court for publish a lie, they have a back up that certifies the story
Does not apply to a Public Free domain like YouTube, only if you have to pay to publish your story or video

wolfpack1jmb

the only case she could have against you is slander, but then again it doesnt harm her in any way, so she wouldnt win. just take it off right now to get a good grade in there and put it back up the day school ends... get my drift?

ohhhh and p.s. use a second youtube account to repost so you won't run into any problems in the future. dont let her boss you around like that.

Windy

Yes and no. Your teacher has the right not to have anything about her posted on the internet, especially if it's not true. You have the right to freedom of speech. The two are different. Do you want to pass this year? Just remove it. Not a big deal.

marcopchen

its kind of illegal. in ur case its not bad cuz nobody cares and isnt pressing charges.

kelly18xxoxx

false advertising is illegal.. but that doesnt seem like to much of a huge deal..

Enter Your Message or Comment

User Name:
User Email:
Post a comment: