Dignitarian Posthumous Personality Rights - An Analysis of U.S. and German Constitutional and Tort Law

H. Rösler
{"title":"Dignitarian Posthumous Personality Rights - An Analysis of U.S. and German Constitutional and Tort Law","authors":"H. Rösler","doi":"10.15779/Z38SH3W","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Should reputational protections exist for the dead in general and in artistic works in particular? After all, there currently seems to be a trend to spice up depictions of actual incidents by adding imaginary elements, or to intersperse historical facts and figures to render a fully made-up story more credible. The present article examines whether family heirs have legally cognizable rights against inaccurate portrayals of their deceased relatives. Toward this end, the article compares U.S. law to the quite different German approach in the Mephisto decision - a landmark ruling issued by German Federal Constitutional Court (Bundesverfassungsgericht) that established a right to posthumous personality protections based on human dignity (BVerfGE 30, 173). The traditional common law position is, however, that the publication of defamatory material about a deceased person does not give rise to a cause of action by relatives or an organization having the task of protecting the deceased's reputation, and that even a commenced action often has no survivability. This the dead don't hear approach gets - as said - contrasted with the wide-ranging protection for deceased persons in Germany, which is only limited by the passage of time. The article covers in comparative perspective issue such as human dignity as a constitutional value, the basis of of postmortales Persoenlichkeitsrecht including its time span and rights to sue, the prospects for developing a common law posthumous personality right, the particular value of artistic expressions and the remedies available.","PeriodicalId":325917,"journal":{"name":"Berkeley Journal of International Law","volume":"2 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2008-12-09","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"6","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Berkeley Journal of International Law","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.15779/Z38SH3W","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 6

Abstract

Should reputational protections exist for the dead in general and in artistic works in particular? After all, there currently seems to be a trend to spice up depictions of actual incidents by adding imaginary elements, or to intersperse historical facts and figures to render a fully made-up story more credible. The present article examines whether family heirs have legally cognizable rights against inaccurate portrayals of their deceased relatives. Toward this end, the article compares U.S. law to the quite different German approach in the Mephisto decision - a landmark ruling issued by German Federal Constitutional Court (Bundesverfassungsgericht) that established a right to posthumous personality protections based on human dignity (BVerfGE 30, 173). The traditional common law position is, however, that the publication of defamatory material about a deceased person does not give rise to a cause of action by relatives or an organization having the task of protecting the deceased's reputation, and that even a commenced action often has no survivability. This the dead don't hear approach gets - as said - contrasted with the wide-ranging protection for deceased persons in Germany, which is only limited by the passage of time. The article covers in comparative perspective issue such as human dignity as a constitutional value, the basis of of postmortales Persoenlichkeitsrecht including its time span and rights to sue, the prospects for developing a common law posthumous personality right, the particular value of artistic expressions and the remedies available.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
尊严的死后人格权——美国和德国宪法和侵权法分析
死者的名誉保护应该普遍存在吗,尤其是在艺术作品中?毕竟,目前似乎有一种趋势,通过添加虚构的元素来为真实事件的描述增添情趣,或者穿插历史事实和人物,使一个完全虚构的故事更可信。本文探讨家庭继承人是否有法律上可承认的权利,以反对对其已故亲属的不准确描绘。为此,本文将美国法律与德国在Mephisto一案中截然不同的做法进行了比较。Mephisto一案是德国联邦宪法法院(Bundesverfassungsgericht)发布的一项具有里程碑意义的裁决,该裁决确立了基于人类尊严的死后人格保护权利(BVerfGE 30,173)。然而,传统的普通法立场是,发表对死者的诽谤材料不会引起亲属或负有保护死者名誉任务的组织提起诉讼,即使已经开始的诉讼通常也没有生存能力。正如前面所说,这种“逝者不听”的做法与德国对逝者的广泛保护形成了鲜明对比,后者只受到时间流逝的限制。本文从比较的角度探讨了人的尊严作为一项宪法价值、死后人格权的基础(包括时间跨度和诉讼权利)、英美法系发展死后人格权的前景、艺术表现的特殊价值以及可获得的救济等问题。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Maritime Interdiction of North Korean Ships under UN Sanctions The South China Sea as a Challenge to International Law and to International Legal Scholarship Back in the Game: International Humanitarian Lawmaking by States International Law and Corporate Participation in Times of Armed Conflict Reversing the Two Wrong Turns in the Economic Analysis of International Law: A Club Goods Theory of Treaty Membership & European Integration
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1