Monthly Archive

US Weekly posted an article in October 2005 about a Britney Spears/Kevin Federline sex tape.  Britney Spears filed a defamation case against US Weekly after US Weekly claimed that Britney Spears and Kevin Federline created a very crazy sex tape that would soon be leaked to the public. Britney Spears found this “false and outrageous” and sought 10 million dollars in damages. What I would like to know is - Is it defamatory to state that a husband and wife taped themselves having consensual sex? Britney is looked at as an extremely sexual woman and has remained open about her sexuality to her fans. She wears little clothing on stage, in her videos, at the grocery store, and even shows her crotch in public. The judge ruled that there was no basis behind Britneys. Britney puts herself out there as a profitable sexual pop star. Therefore, the image of Britney and Kevin having sex did not destroy the sexualized image she previously created.     The article in US Weekly also stated that Spears and Federline acted “goofy” at their lawyers office when they first discussed the possibility of the sex videos release. Why didn’t the judge consider this as defamatory? Calling Britney “goofy” would not destroy her career. But, that doesn’t mean its legally ok to state Britney acted “goofy” when discussing her private sex video soon to be released to the public. Did the judge make a mistake? Because she acted “goofy” the reader now assumes Britney didn’t take the videos public release very seriously. I think this should have been discussed more thoroughly in the case.