It is imprecise terminology that “privacy”. Thus there are various ideas about how define privacy in general and legal, also that makes privacy law strongly complicated. S.Warren and L. Brandies defined it as “the right to be alone”. This definition seems discrete still, but holds its whole image. Then in the law, W. Prosser mentioned the peculiarity of privacy. According to him, there are four sections: intrusion, public disclosure of private facts, false light in the public eye, and appropriation. Today, these four sections are the main thoughts of privacy still and there is complicated, but clear interpretation. But still, these categories don’t make me acknowledge what exactly privacy is. So, I Googled, and there comes up a loooot of definitions…. Privacy is because of imprecise terminology, it will be used in many situations as it subsidiary.
Before I deliver my opinion, I want to introduce the law suit in Japan. The case of Miri Yu vs. the model of novel had an important side as invasion of privacy vs. freedom expression. Actually, this is considered one of the important leading case examples on the Supreme Court in Japan.
The plaintiff sued Miri Yu (writer), and the magazine’s publisher, in November, 1994. 26 places about the main character in the novel were accorded with the plaintiff. And Tokyo district court judged that the plaintiff’s all qualities were copied to the main character, and these contents were enough to regard the main character as the plaintiff. Then the court announced two points about a definition of invasion of privacy: first, the plaintiff does not hope to be made public the facts, and second, the situation that there are privacy facts which are not disclosed for public and there is possibility that the plaintiff gets mental anguish when it goes public.
Yu side maintained that if there were some invasion of privacy in the novel, freedom of expression must allow publishing them in public. Tokyo district court admitted that there is possibility to allow invasion of privacy of somebody with freedom of expression if the expression were a valid concern for society, however, it is only for when the exhibition is regarded imperative and there must be a situation that a novelist has to express a valid concern for society. And in this case, the court stated this case as there did not seem any impetrates to announce the plaintiff’s privacy on the magazine as far as it is a novel.