If Taylor Swift sued Donald Trump over sharing AI images, how strong would her case be?
August 23, 2024 – Media MentionDoug Mirell, litigation partner and First Amendment expert, was quoted extensively in The Tennessean discussing potential legal claims that could result from AI-generated images and other postings falsely declaring that Taylor Swift is endorsing Donald Trump.
Excerpts:
Douglas Mirell, a partner at Los Angeles' Greenberg Glusker, is a litigation attorney who specializes in media, entertainment and intellectual property. Mirell, who has experience with AI-centered entertainment cases, laid out the strengths and weaknesses in Swift's case.
He said that Trump pleading ignorance is not much of a hole in Swift's case. Since he spread the images, he can be held liable under the [Ensuring Likeness Voice and Image Security (ELVIS)] Act.
The issue with Swift's case, though, is that the ELVIS Act — and all legal statutes in other states — provides an exemption for parody and satire. . . .
"I have no doubt whatsoever that if (Trump) were sued over this, he would claim it is satire or parody or both, and he'd be bolstered in that claim by a couple of cases that the U.S. Supreme Court decided many moons ago," Mirell said.
One case was Hustler Magazine vs. Jerry Falwell; another was Campbell vs. Acuff-Rose Music. In these cases, the U.S. Supreme Court decided that a targeted phony ad and a song similar to a Roy Orbison song were both considered parodies and protected under the First Amendment, Mirell said.
"A claim could be brought, but (Trump's) defense, based upon those exceptions, seems to me to be pretty strong," Mirell said.
If Swift wants a stronger case against Trump, Mirell said she could sue on grounds of defamation . . . over his written statement at the top of his post saying "I accept!"
"That would be a materially false statement of fact that people, regardless of whether they believe . . . the image was phony, . . . might think . . . Taylor has in fact endorsed him," Mirell said.
