By creator to www.wgbh.org
The latest New York Occasions piece “Who Is The Dangerous Artwork Good friend” has everybody weighing in on-line as readers marvel how one girl’s story of organ donation might lead to allegations of plagiarism and drawn-out authorized battles. Brianna Wu, govt director of Rebel PAC, and Kelcee Griffis, senior telecom reporter for Legislation360, joined Sue O’Connell on Higher Boston to interrupt down the viral story.
Throughout Gamergate, an internet harassment marketing campaign that focused girls within the gamer group in 2014, Wu was topic to harassment from folks on-line going by way of private components of her life, just like what occurred within the “dangerous artwork buddy” story. She says the case, a “actually human drama,” brings up moral questions.
“The extra fascinating story right here is — the New York Occasions had each proper to publish this story,” she mentioned. “I feel there are some questions within the newsroom — was it actually well worth the injury that they’ve accomplished to those two girls’s lives?”
Griffis mentioned that copyright legislation is sophisticated and generally open to interpretation, but it surely’s not unusual for the authorized protections to favor the “secondary creator,” even when they write about somebody’s private life.
“There’s this sense that non-public work or your story shouldn’t be shared by another person,” she mentioned. “However copyright legislation very a lot protects the creators of secondary works.”
WATCH: ‘Dangerous Artwork Good friend’ Sparks Debates On Journalism Ethics, Copyright Legislation And Cyberbullying
— to www.wgbh.org