Book contents
- The Right to Privacy
- Cambridge Intellectual Property and Information Law
- The Right to Privacy
- Copyright page
- Dedication
- Contents
- Illustrations
- Preface
- Acknowledgements
- Introduction
- 1 Authorship, Secrecy, Privacy
- 2 Creative Self-fashioning
- 3 Intimate Images
- 4 Resisting Spectacle
- 5 Make It New!
- Appendix: Documentation
- Index
- Cambridge Intellectual Property and Information Law
- References
3 - Intimate Images
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 28 September 2017
Book contents
- The Right to Privacy
- Cambridge Intellectual Property and Information Law
- The Right to Privacy
- Copyright page
- Dedication
- Contents
- Illustrations
- Preface
- Acknowledgements
- Introduction
- 1 Authorship, Secrecy, Privacy
- 2 Creative Self-fashioning
- 3 Intimate Images
- 4 Resisting Spectacle
- 5 Make It New!
- Appendix: Documentation
- Index
- Cambridge Intellectual Property and Information Law
- References
Summary
A summary is not available for this content so a preview has been provided. Please use the Get access link above for information on how to access this content.
- Type
- Chapter
- Information
- The Right to PrivacyOrigins and Influence of a Nineteenth-Century Idea, pp. 38 - 61Publisher: Cambridge University PressPrint publication year: 2017
References
Works Cited
Borax ‘Californian’ (Advertisement) (1890, July). Lippincott’s Monthly Magazine (English ed.), after 162.Google Scholar
Copyright (Works of Art) Bill, Hansard, HC, vol 165, cols 1889–1893, 20 March 1862.Google Scholar
Copyright (Works of Art) Bill, Hansard, HL, vol 166, cols 2013–2020, 22 May 1862.Google Scholar
‘The Importance of Being Earnest’ (1895, February 14). Programme. Victoria & Albert Museum, www.vam.ac.uk/content/articles/t/the-importance-of-being-earnest-first-stage-production/.Google Scholar
The Judgment Delivered Yesterday by Mr Justice North in the Case of Pollard and Wife v the Photographic Company (1888, December 21). The Times, 9.Google Scholar
Tussaud, Madame & Sons Catalogue (1892). Pilbeam, P. Madame Tussaud and the History of Waxworks. London: Hambledon and London, 2003, 178.Google Scholar
Pears’ Soap (Advertisement) (1888, October 20). The Illustrated London News (Australasian Edition), 92, 493.Google Scholar
‘Proctor’s Pinelyptus Pastilles’ (Advertisement) (1905, January–June). Strand Magazine, 64.Google Scholar
Rachel’s Last Portrait (1858, June 19). The Lady’s Newspaper and Pictorial Times, 387.Google Scholar
Bajac, Q. (2002). The Invention of Photography: The First Fifty Years. London: Thames & Hudson.Google Scholar
Beverley-Smith, H., Ohly, A. and Lucas-Schloetter, A. (2005). Privacy, Property and Personality Civil Law Perspectives on Commercial Appropriation. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Bowrey, K. (2012). ‘The World Daguerreotyped: What a Spectacle!’ Copyright Law, Photography and the Economic Mission of Empire. In Sherman, B. and Wiseman, L. (Eds.), Copyright and the Challenge of the New (11–42). Alphen aan den Rijn: Kluwer Law International.Google Scholar
Braudy, L. (2010). Secular Anointings: Fame, Celebrity, and Charisma in the First Century of Mass Culture. In Berenson, E. and Giloi, E. (Eds.), Constructing Charisma: Celebrity, Fame, and Power in Nineteenth-century Europe (164–182). New York: Berghahn Books.Google Scholar
Burrow-Giles Lithographic Co v Sarony, 11 US 53 (1884).Google Scholar
Chaix-d’Est-Ange, G. (1858, juin 10). Portrait de Mlle Rachel Sur Son Lit De Mort. Gazettes Des Tribunaux, 559–560.Google Scholar
Copinger, W. (1915). The Law of Copyright, in Works of Literature, Art, Architecture, Photography, Music and the Drama: Including Chapters on Mechanical Contrivances (5th ed.). Easton, J. M.. London: Stevens and Haynes.Google Scholar
Crombie, I. (1999). The Sorcerer’s Machine: A Photographic Portrait by Douglas Kilburn, 1847. Art Journal of the National Gallery of Victoria, 7–12.Google Scholar
De May v Roberts, 46 Mich 160 (1881).Google Scholar
Denis v Leclerc, 1 Mart (os) 297 (1811).Google Scholar
Diamond, M. (2003). Victorian Sensation, or, the Spectacular, the Shocking, and the Scandalous in Nineteenth-century Britain. London: Anthem Press.Google Scholar
Dockrell v Dougall (1898) 78 LTR 840.Google Scholar
Dolby v Newnes (1887) 3 TLR 393.Google Scholar
Ellis v Marshall (1895) 64 LJ QB 757.Google Scholar
Ellis v Ogden (1894) 11 TLR 50.Google Scholar
Ellis, K. (2009). Systems Failure in Operatic Paris. In Fauser, A. and Everist, M. (Eds.), Music, Theatre, and Cultural Transfer: Paris, 1830–1914 (49–71). Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Falconer, J. and Hide, L. (2009). Points of View: Capturing the 19th Century in Photographs. London: British Library.Google Scholar
Félix c O’Connell, 16 juin 1858, Trib civ de la Seine, 1ere Ch, Dalloz 1858.Google Scholar
Fine Arts Copyright Act 1862 (25 & 26 Vict, c 68).Google Scholar
Garvey, E. G. (1996). The Adman in the Parlour: Magazines and the Gendering of Consumer Culture, 1880s to 1910s. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Giloi, E. (2010). ‘So Writes the Hand that Swings the Sword’: Autograph Hunting and Royal Charisma. In Berenson, E. and Giloi, E. (Eds.), Constructing Charisma: Celebrity, Fame, and Power in Nineteenth-century Europe (41–51). New York: Berghahn Books.Google Scholar
Giradin, D. and Pirker, C., with Benhamou, Y. (2012). Controversies: A Legal and Ethical History of Photography. Arles: Actes Sud; Lausanne: Musee de l’Elysee.Google Scholar
Goldenfein, J. (2013). Police Photography and Privacy: Identity, Stigma and Reasonable Expectation. University of New South Wales Law Journal, 36(1), 256–279.Google Scholar
Hadjiafxendi, K. and Zakreski, P. (Eds.) (2011). What Is a Woman to Do? A Reader on Women, Work and Art, 1830–1890. Bern: Peter Lang.Google Scholar
Hannavy, J. (2008). Encyclopaedia of Nineteenth-century Photography. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
Hauch, J. (1994). Protecting Private Facts in France: The Warren & Brandeis Tort Is Alive and Well and Flourishing in Paris. Tulane Law Review, 68, 1219–1301.Google Scholar
von Jhering, R. (1879). The Struggle for Law (Der Kampf ums Recht) (2nd ed.) (Lalor, J., Trans. 1915). Chicago: Callaghan and Company.Google Scholar
von Jhering, R. (1877). Der Zweck im Recht. Leipzig: Breitkopf & Härtel. Translated as Law as a Means to an End (1913). Boston: Boston Book Company.Google Scholar
von Jhering, R. (1883). The Battle for Right (Der Kampf ums Recht). London: Stevens & Sons.Google Scholar
Larousse, P. (1856). Nouveau Dictionnaire de la Langue Française (3rd ed.). Paris: Larousse et Boyer.Google Scholar
Larousse, P. (1875). Grand dictionnaire universel du XIXe siècle: Français, historique, géographique, mythologique, bibliographique, littéraire, artistique, scientifique, etc., etc., tome treizieme. Paris: Administration du Grand Dictionnaire Universel.Google Scholar
Loi Sur la Liberté de la Presse du 29 juillet 1881.Google Scholar
Loi Relative à la Presse du 11 Mai 1868.Google Scholar
Lucas-Schloetter, A. (2005). French Law. In Beverley-Smith, H., Ohly, A. and Lucas-Schloetter, A., Privacy, Property and Personality: Civil Law Perspectives on Commercial Appropriation (147–205). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Millais, J. G. (1899). The Life and Letters of Sir John Everett Millais, President of the Royal Academy. London: Methuen.Google Scholar
Moore v Rugg, 44 Minn 28 (1890).Google Scholar
Morris, R. (2013). Declaring His Genius: Oscar Wilde in North America. Boston: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
North, M. (2010). The Picture of Oscar Wilde. Publications of the Modern Language Association, 125, 185–191.Google Scholar
Ohly, A. (2005). German Law. In Beverley-Smith, H., Ohly, A. and Lucas-Schloetter, A., Privacy, Property and Personality: Civil Law Perspectives on Commercial Appropriation (94–146). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Perrauld-Charmantier, A. (1930). Le Droit de Réponse Dans la Presse. Paris: Marchal et Billard.Google Scholar
Perreau, M. E. H. (1909). Des Droits de la Personnalité. Revue Trimestrielle de Droit Civil, 8, 501–534.Google Scholar
Reichsgericht (II Strafsenat) vom 29 November 1989.Google Scholar
Reichsgericht vom 28 Dezember 1899.Google Scholar
Reimann, M. (1993). ‘The Common Law and German Legal Science’. In Gordon, R. (Ed.), The Legacy of Oliver Wendell Holmes, Jr (72–114). Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press.Google Scholar
Salkowski, C. (1886). Institutes and History of Roman Private Law: With Catena of Texts (Lehrbuch der Institutionen und der Geschichte des Römischen Privatrechts). Whitfield, E. E. (Ed. and Trans.). London: Stevens and Haynes.Google Scholar
Stoll, H. (1999). The General Right to Personality in German Law: An Outline of Its Development and Present Significance. In Markesinis, B. (Ed.), Protecting Privacy (29–46). Oxford: Clarendon Press.Google Scholar
Stoufflet, J. (1957). Le droit de la personne sur son image. Juris-Classeur Périodique, 2, 1374.Google Scholar
Subotnik, E. (2016). The Author Was Not an Author: The Copyright Interests of Photographic Subjects from Wilde to Garcia. Columbia Journal of Law and the Arts, 39, 449–461.Google Scholar
Tuck & Sons v Priester (1887) 19 QBD 629.Google Scholar
Wagner, W. (1970). The Right to One’s Own Likeness in French Law. Indiana Law Journal, 46, 1–36.Google Scholar
Whistler, J. (1899). Eden versus Whistler: The Baronet and the Butterfly: A Valentine with a Verdict. Paris: Louis-Henry May; New York: RH Russell.Google Scholar
Whitman, J. (2004). The Two Western Cultures of Privacy: Dignity versus Liberty. Yale Law Journal, 113, 1151–1221.Google Scholar
Zweigert, K. and Siehr, K. (1971). Jhering’s Influence on the Development of Comparative Legal Method. American Journal of Comparative Law, 19, 215.Google Scholar