Manuel Noriega, a former Panamanian dictator, is trying to sue the creators of the popular video game series, "Call of Duty" for "damaging his reputation". The game portrays Noriega as a criminal and enemy of the state, which, from what I have read, doesn't seem to be stretching the truth. From what people have said, the case is likely to be dismissed. This got me wondering why it would be so easily dismissed. Does the fact that he isn't a US citizen mean that he doesn't have rights to protect his image? Does it matter that he is still alive, and should the game's creators have asked his permission to use his likeness?
The fact that he is portrayed doing things that he is actually convicted of, seems to me like the lawsuit really should be dismissed. This raises a concern about ethics in video games. Where is the ethical boundary in video games portraying real people?
My position is that a video game is a work of art, and the creator should be free to portray people as he wishes, within reason. Once the portrayal becomes slanderous and legitimately damaging to someone's reputation, then I feel there are grounds to take action against such portrayal.
1 comment:
In my humble opinion, since he is not a citizen of the United States, he has no right under our law to protect his image. He can do anything he wants in his country. He can ban the game from being imported and punish anyone who is caught with it, but that's the extent of his influence on the matter.
Post a Comment