Steven Tyler Act passes: New curbs on paparazzi

Steven Tyler Act passes Hawaii senate: The bill tries to protect celebrities, such as Steven Tyler, from zealous photographers. Steven Tyler owns a home in Maui.

By , Associated Press

  • close
    Aerosmith lead singer Steven Tyler testified last month on celebrity privacy during a hearing at the Hawaii Capitol in Honolulu.
    View Caption

The Hawaii state Senate passed the so-called Steven Tyler Act Tuesday, a bill that seeks to protect celebrities from overeager paparazzi by creating a civil violation if people take unwanted photos or videos of others in their private moments.

The Aerosmith frontman from Massachusetts asked Sen. Kalani English to sponsor the legislation after unwanted photos were taken of him and his girlfriend last December and published in a national magazine, causing family drama.

Tyler owns a multimillion dollar home in Maui, which is part of English's district. English said the proposal could help increase celebrity tourism in Hawaii.

Recommended: Super Bowl 2014: The 7 best halftime shows of all time

Twenty-three of the state's 25 Senate members voted in favor of the bill, which now goes to the House for consideration.

Sen. Sam Slom, the body's only Republican, opposed the measure.

"We have been the butt of many editorials and jokes across the country for this proposed legislation," he said.

Slom said senators had fun with the bill, but Hawaii has adequate laws protecting privacy and this proposal is an attack on rights guaranteed by the First Amendment of the U.S. Constitution.

"My final remarks to Steven Tyler as he sang so eloquently are, 'Dream on, dream on,'" Slom joked.

Besides Tyler, other celebrities have supported the bill, including Britney Spears, Mick Fleetwood and the Osborne family.

They say intrusive paparazzi make it difficult to enjoy simple activities with family and friends.

But national media organizations worry about the proposal's impact on freedom of the press. The National Press Photographers Association and the Society of Professional Journalists were among several national media organizations that submitted testimony opposing the bill.

The Senate Judiciary Committee responded to criticism of the measure's vague language by replacing the original version with the text of an existing California anti-paparazzi statute.

But longtime media lawyer Jeff Portnoy said the bill is still problematic.

"It's better, but it doesn't change its fatal flaws," he said. The measure's language is still ambiguous and it is unnecessary, given Hawaii's existing laws, Portnoy said.

"Our only chance to get some sanity into this is in the House," he said.

As The Christian Science Monitor reported, laws to protect celebrities from paparazzi are spreading. In California, for example, the laws now:

• Protect celebrities against trespass or the use of audio- or video-enhancing equipment that violates a reasonable expectation of privacy and make it easier for celebrities to sue for invasion of privacy.

• Increase the penalties for paparazzi who cause altercations in their attempt to photograph celebrities, and prohibit paparazzi from profiting from such images.

• Penalize paparazzi who drive recklessly to get a photo with as much as six months in jail and a $2,500 fine.

Copyright 2013 The Associated Press.

Share this story:
 
 
Make a Difference
Inspired? Here are some ways to make a difference on this issue.
Follow Stories Like This
Get the Monitor stories you care about delivered to your inbox.
 

We want to hear, did we miss an angle we should have covered? Should we come back to this topic? Or just give us a rating for this story. We want to hear from you.

Loading...

Loading...

Loading...