Critical Thinking Answer 2022

Running head- CRITICAL THINKING EXERCISE
Critical Thinking Exercise
Name of the Student
Name of the University
Author Note

Critical Thinking Exercise1
Answer to 1
The case was brought in the Supreme Court. This case vetoed a First Amendment
guard to right of the publicity entitlements when the videogame of Madden NFL portrayed
professional football players devoid of their consent or approval. The professional football
involved in this cars was Angeles Rams. However the district court upon the rule stated that
might br similar. The EA’s mission was dismissed the ant slap transformation use.
Answer to 2
The Missouri Court of Appeals in St. Louis upheld a judgment in contradiction of the
artist and stated that the first amendment did not protect his speech as they were the violation
of the publicity rights of a professional player. The court determined with the word “twist”
that the purpose of the name “Tony Twist” was to sell the products and not to make a
comment about twisting the hockey players. I agree with the judgment of the court as this
was a sheer violation of the Publicity rights of the hockey players.
Answer to 3
Jonah Hex is a comic book about a Civil War warrior that was issued by the DC
comics. In the year 1995, Timothy Truman and Sam Glanzman announced a wicked duo
named Edgar Autumn and Jhonny. The Winter Brothers sued DC upon the fact that the
creation by them violated the right to publicity. The argument was such that the character was
portrayed as a person having no moral and ethical sense. The case went on for eight years,
and then the California supreme court gave their judgment in favour of DC upon the grounds
of First amendment.

Critical Thinking Exercise2
Answer to 4
The court held that the claim against the Sherriff was restricted by the doctrine of
Qualified immunity as in the prior scenario the Sheriff had enough knowledge to understand
the fact about the plaintiff’s dismissal in regards to the breach of Loyalty (Wolff, 2014).
Finally the court held that the claims for the reinstatement did not bar the future relief and
remanded it further to the district court to proceed the trial for the reinstatements but
confirmed the discharge of all other claims (Stein, 2014).
Answer to 5
The Bloggers are entitled to be treated under the same standards for the freedom of
speech as a journalist. The Federal district court gave the decision, Ninth Circuit suggested
that the rights ensured to the journalists under the First Amendment does not depend on the
fact that the defendant was a skilled journalist or affiliated with traditional ethics or in turn
tried both scenarios (Linquist et al, 2015). The speech of the bloggers should not be
restricted, and they too have the right of the freedom of speech, and in no ways, they should
be deprived of such rights.
Answer to 6
As per the claims of the website owner is liable for defamation as per the facts the
website used to post nasty comments and images that hampered the dignity of one person and
defamed him in a web platform where the allegations are visible. As per the rights guaranteed
under the First Amendment, nobody has a right to question someone’s else dignity, and in
this case, the dignity of the person was effected due to such comments and such platform. So
as a result, it was the responsibility of the owner for the verification.