Identify and analyze the legal issues in this hypothetical problem.

Identify and analyze the legal issues in this hypothetical problem.

The hypothetical problem represented involves issues that occur with a business when the business partners become careless in observing the rules and regulations indicated by such organizations or by the governing bodies within the business category. The significant issues in our case involve the advertising sector, where the primary concern has a connection with Dan Lebesnort’s website ‘Sports Regurgitated.’ Several legal issues have been subjected to Dan’s website, which is against the Florida laws and other statutory laws, which are as indicated below.

Defamation

Defamation[1] involves false information that ends up destroying another person’s reputation. In such a case,  a person can file a lawsuit on defamation, which is the best way of solving the issue. In our case, there are several defamation cases which mainly involve Dan Lebesnort by either committing them directly or indirectly. For instance, Dan has used libel[2] to defame LeBron, a famous basketballer. Dan has been very careless since, instead of conducting appropriate research, he has ended up using false statistics regarding LeBron, especially arguing that the player is overrated, and at the same time, he is overpaid. Dan has also defamed LeBron’s mother by allegedly indicating that she is suffering from a sexually transmitted disease, which shows that he has invaded her privacy[3] by revealing her medical information without her consent. As well, Dan will face the State Defamation Law Before New York Times v. Sullivan[4] if the information he printed on his website concerning LeBron’s mother turns out to be false.  Also, the Food and Drug Administration is seeking a court order since they feel that Dr. Henry, who uses Dan’s website, has defamed their products since he is using false information. Therefore, in the matters of defamatory cases, the advertiser and the channel of advertising have a high risk of getting sued if they carelessly advertise anything that has ungrounded evidence.

Technology and 1^st Amendment

Technology and the 1^st amendment[5] concern the Federal Communication Commission[6] , where they restrict any obscene or indecency information through various channels instead of prohibiting such information. The main action involves censorship[7] wherein case the advertiser knows that the information is explicit; they have to censor to avoid exposing minors into the obscene situations that might affect their morality. Dan has broken the rule by creating an animation that has some explicit actions and words involving LeBron and a minor having sex while the spectators utter explicit words. Dan’s action went against the Memoirs v. Massachusetts[8], where he would be convicted for having erotic illustrations in his animation and through its action of going against the social value.

 Commercial Speech: Bigelow v. Virginia (1975)

Bigelow v. Virginia (1975)[9] indicates that the advertisers have relied on truthful information that will be helpful to the general public. Through such a statement, it means that anything that can harm the general public should not be advertised, and if advertised, all the truthful information should be provided. The point is supported by Florida’s Law, which requires all advertisers to unveil all information, especially on land that poses dangers to the health factor. Hence, Dan’s website has indulged in advertising illegal products by advertising Everglades’s development that, on one occasion, was mentioned as toxic waste site dangerous for habitation, thus posing for legal action by the authorities. In that case, Dan would have been on the safer side if he would have declined the offer or indicated the said speculations to avoid going against the rules. Also, Dan, through the same client, wants to run a public referendum concerning the wetlands openings and the oil drillings despite its prohibition by the Florida laws. Also, they will be violating the rules of 1^st Nat’l Bank of Boston v. Belloti (1978)[10] which prohibits advertisements that influence the voters unless it is related to business. By agreeing on her terms, Dan will be breaking the laws that are clearly stated. Also, the factor on Dr. Henry is part of Commercial speech where Va. State Bd. of Pharmacy v. Va. Citizens Consumer Council (1976)[11] where the law states allow reasonable TPM constraints, which requires advertisers to maintain a clean flow of information. Therefore, by Dr. Henry publicizing the sexual enhancement ads, he should ensure that he follows the rules and regulations since the information he provides has questionable content.

The legal issues stated above have put Dan in a critical situation where he is the main victim in all cases. That might be the reason why he has gone into hiding since he is aware that all the information that he posted on his website, none had firm ground, and the information was just mere propaganda. Therefore, advertisers need to consider all legal laws concerning the information that they publish to avoid implicating oneself against federal and legal laws.

[1] can be described as destroying other people’s reputation

[2] Libel- defaming a person through written or printed documents

[3].  The privacy should be upheld unless the owner wants to publicly talk about the issue concerning them

[4] State Defamation Law Before New York Times v. Sullivan

[5] Technology and the 1^st amendment

[6]

[7] Censorship

[8] Memoires v. Massachusetts

[9] Bigelow v. Virginia (1975) on truth and general interest

[10] 1^st Nat’l Bank of Boston v. Belloti (1978)

[11] Va. State Bd. of Pharmacy v. Va. Citizens Consumer Council (1976)