Michaels v. Internet Entertainment Group was one of the first court cases over a private video distributed on the internet without permission. In 1998, a federal judge in Los Angeles blocked an adult website company from putting a private video of rock singer Bret Michaels and actress Pamela Anderson Lee online, ruling that both copyright and privacy law protected them.
If an older article or encyclopedia sent you here, the original case summary from this site is preserved in the Internet Archive: view the archived page. You can also browse more early internet law cases.
What Happened
Michaels, the lead singer of the band Poison, and Anderson Lee, then known for the television series Baywatch, had made a private video while they were a couple. Years later, a copy came into the hands of Internet Entertainment Group, a Seattle company that ran adult websites. The company announced plans to sell access to the video online.
Michaels sued to stop it, and Anderson Lee joined the case. They argued that the company had no right to distribute a video in which Michaels held a registered copyright, and that showing it would be a severe invasion of their privacy.
What the Court Decided
In April 1998, the court granted a preliminary injunction, a court order blocking the company from distributing the video while the case went forward. The judge found that Michaels was likely to win his copyright claim, because he had registered the copyright in the video and the license the company claimed to have did not allow it to distribute the tape.
The court also found the couple likely to win their privacy claims. The company argued that the video was newsworthy because both were celebrities. The judge disagreed, finding that the public’s interest in the couple’s relationship did not justify showing the most private details of their lives.
Why It Mattered
The case was an early sign that courts would protect people’s privacy online, even public figures, and that copyright could be used to stop the spread of private material. It has been cited many times since, including in a 2015 Slate article on wrestler Hulk Hogan’s privacy lawsuit against the website Gawker, which ended in a 2016 jury verdict.
Since then, every state has passed laws against sharing intimate images without consent. In 2025, Congress passed the Take It Down Act, which makes it a federal crime to publish such images without consent, including AI-generated fakes, and requires online platforms to remove them within 48 hours of a valid request.
Privacy and Young People Online Today
Concerns about privacy online now center on children and teens. Among their claims, families suing Meta, TikTok, Snap and Google allege that the companies’ apps made it too easy for adult strangers to find and contact young users, and that the companies failed to give parents effective tools to protect their children.
If social media harmed your child, Doyle APC handles these claims together with experienced co-counsel. Learn who may qualify for compensation.
Common Questions
What was Michaels v. Internet Entertainment Group about?
Bret Michaels and Pamela Anderson Lee sued to stop an adult website company from distributing a private video of them online without their permission.
What did the court decide?
In April 1998, a federal court in Los Angeles blocked the company from distributing the video, finding the couple likely to win on copyright and privacy grounds.
Can celebrities claim privacy?
Yes, within limits. The court ruled that being famous did not make the most private details of the couple’s lives fair game for publication.
What is the Take It Down Act?
A 2025 federal law that makes it a crime to publish intimate images of a person without consent and requires online platforms to remove them within 48 hours of a valid request.
Who runs this site now?
Doyle APC, a San Diego law firm that represents people nationwide in mass tort cases. Doyle APC handles social media addiction claims together with experienced co-counsel. Learn more about the firm.