Return to Transcripts main page

American Morning

Aniston's Lawsuit Begins Today

Aired July 02, 2002 - 07:20   ET

THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.

THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.
PAULA ZAHN, CNN ANCHOR: She is one of America's "Friends." Well, today Jennifer Aniston is taking on a new role as plaintiff. The actress plans to testify in her suit against the magazine publishers who ran unauthorized pictures of her sunbathing topless in her backyard. The non-jury trial begins today in Los Angeles and the question is does Aniston's topless lawsuit have legs?

We know she does.

CNN legal analyst Jeffrey Toobin is here to look at this case from top to bottom.

How are you this morning?

JEFFREY TOOBIN, CNN LEGAL ANALYST: Very well, ma'am.

ZAHN: Why should we care about this case, Mr. Toobin?

TOOBIN: Well, because she's a celebrity and we care about celebrities, their tragic plight. No, I mean, it is actually more interesting than I thought when I started looking into this. You'd think it's sort of straightforward that there ought to be some rules about when you can take pictures and when you can't and how you can publish it. Courts have actually been struggling with this exact issue for more than 20 years and they still can't come up with very clear rules that protect people's privacy and the rights of the press.

So it's actually more murky than you think.

ZAHN: So help me better understand what the issue is here. Is she, then she's not going to argue that her privacy was violated, that her right of publicity was violated? And what does that mean exactly?

TOOBIN: Well, she made two claims originally. One is that her right to privacy was violated and the second was her right to publicity.

Let's talk about the right to publicity first.

That means that no one can take a photograph of you without your permission and say Paula Zahn drinks Pepsi, so should you. It's basically commercial exploitation of your name. That's actually a pretty weak claim here because even though "High Society" is not what we think of as a great journalistic institution, it is a magazine and any sort of pulp photographs that are published but not in an advertisement generally don't involve the right to publicity. So that's one part of her claim.

The other part of her claim, and it seems like the more substantive one, is the right to privacy. And there the rules are a little murkier, but it makes a little more sense. If you have a reasonable expectation of privacy, if you are sunbathing in your backyard, for example...

ZAHN: Topless or not topless.

TOOBIN: Topless or not, it's your own backyard. You can dress however you like. And someone takes a picture of you and then publishes it, that does seem like a right to privacy violation.

But there is a problem with Jennifer Aniston's lawsuit there. It's because these pulp photographs had been published elsewhere in really obscure European magazines first...

ZAHN: And she never took them on the first time around?

TOOBIN: And she never took them on. So the magazine publishers are saying well, go sue them. Don't sue us. So that's one of the issues that's going to be dealt with in the courts.

ZAHN: But she can make the argument, can she not, that I didn't go after those obscure publications because the circulation is slow and low and none of my fans who watch "Friends" saw it over there and it had no negative impact on me?

TOOBIN: Or I didn't know or you should be responsible for what's published in your own magazine. That shouldn't be an excuse, that just because someone else did something wrong, you're allowed to do it, too. So those are some of the issues that will be involved in the trial today.

ZAHN: So what kind of precedent could be set here?

TOOBIN: Well, again, the rule might be, that could come out of this, is that magazine publishers are responsible for learning where photographs come from, that magazine publishers have some right to respect the rights of privacy, even of celebrities, even if the photos have been published first.

Or, it may be the sort of law of the jungle, tough luck for Jennifer Aniston. That's what they're going to decide.

ZAHN: What does it mean for all the shutterbugs out there who are paid handsomely to photograph celebrities in sort of ugly situations and beautiful situations?

TOOBIN: Well, see this, these, this is where the rules have become somewhat unclear. Going back to the late '60s when Jacqueline Kennedy moved with her family to New York after John F. Kennedy's assassination, there was a photographer named Ron Gallela (ph) who followed her obsessively, really stalked her. And she went to court and got a court order saying that he had to stay 100 yards away from her and her kids, who were then little at the time.

An appeals court said 25 feet, not 100 yards. I mean these rules are just sort of made up on the spot. That's likely to be what's going to come out of this. I mean it's not, clear rules are not a likely result.

ZAHN: Who ever thought Jennifer Aniston could be a power broker in court?

TOOBIN: Who knew?

ZAHN: The star of "Friends."

TOOBIN: That's right.

ZAHN: Jeffrey Toobin, thanks for dropping by.

TOOBIN: Well, celebrity.

ZAHN: Appreciate your perspective.

TO ORDER A VIDEO OF THIS TRANSCRIPT, PLEASE CALL 800-CNN-NEWS OR USE OUR SECURE ONLINE ORDER FORM LOCATED AT www.fdch.com