To bring the class a little entertainment in order to break from the traditional issues, the lawsuit I recently saw was between the rapper, Curtis “50 Cent” Jackson and a woman in Florida named Lastonia Leviston. Miss Leviston issued a lawsuit against 50 Cent because of a video he released to the public. Lastonia and her now ex-boyfriend, Maurice Murray, made a video in 2008 that taped their most intimate moments in the bedroom. Murray later sent that video to 50 Cent, without Lastonia’s permission, and 50 Cent edited himself in a character named “Pimpin’ Curly.” “Pimpin’ Curly” proceeds to narrate the events taking place in the video. In 2009, 50 Cent released the video to the public without Lastonia’s permission once again and now is being sued by Lastonia for emotional damages.
At first I wondered why this woman that I had never heard about would have even mattered to 50 Cent. After looking at a second article, the “beef” is not between Leviston and 50 Cent but actually between 50 Cent and his rap game rival, Rick Ross. Lastonia Leviston is Rick Ross’ son’s mother.
The judge in New York claims that because Lastonia did not give permission for her boyfriend to release the tape to 50 Cent, then 50 Cent has no right to release it to the public. 50 Cent claims he was not the one to introduce the video to the public but if that is the case, is he liable to pay for emotional damages to Lastonia Leviston? Is it against her right to privacy if she did not consent but her partner did? In my opinion, I do not think 50 Cent is at fault here. Maurice Murray made the video public by sending it to 50 Cent. Shouldn’t he be the one liable for the damages?
I think Justice Scalia and Brennan would be at odds in this situation. I think it’s pretty obvious that Justice Brennan would side with Leviston because as he say’s the Constitution needs to be flexible to the changing times, so must the right to privacy. In an age of new technologies, video editing, and an extremely high use of the Internet, the justice system needs to take into account that people may not want to be on the Internet but can easily be roped in. Just as in this case, Leviston did not want the video leaked to the public but obviously Maurice Murray did.
I think Justice Scalia would side with 50 Cent because he would say that the text doesn’t protect the victim from a third party that released the tape. The right to privacy was lost when the video was made and given to 50 Cent by Maurice Murray. In this situation, Murray would have released the video to the public and the damages would be at the fault of Murray.
I think it’s very obvious here that she is only going after 50 Cent because he has the most money. She would not sue for under a million dollars, which I’m sure Maurice Murray does not have. Also the amount of money sought after in this lawsuit is ridiculous, how can someone quantify the amount of emotional damages. She would not have made the video if she thought it might get out in the public. In my opinion, there is no case here. A man she should not have trusted and needs to learn from her mistakes just swindled her and now she has to pay for it.