The plaintiff does not Page 1141 argue that she was excused from having to prove actual malice because of the nature of her claim or the nature of Hustler's falsity in regard to her.
We conclude that Robyn Douglass has a cause of action against Hustler for portraying her in a false light.
Several answers are possible, however: 1.
Thus there was an invasion of Zacchini's rights, analogous to copyright, under state tort law.
The plaintiff argues that the slide show, which lasted almost an hour, was an intrinsic part of the expert's testimony; and Hustler's first counter is that the expert was unqualified.
Hustler's violation of her right of privacy created earnings opportunities for her, by freeing up time previously devoted to making commercials for Chicago advertising agencies.
Description: Though distressed by the Hustler incident, Douglass suffered no severe or permanent psychiatric harm--nothing more than transitory emotional distress some of it from obscene phone calls stimulated by the publication.