- Associated Press - Tuesday, March 5, 2013

HONOLULU (AP) - The Hawaii state Senate has passed a bill that seeks to protect celebrities from overeager paparazzi.

The so-called Steven Tyler Act would create a civil violation if people take unwanted photos or videos of others in their private moments.

The rock star from Massachusetts asked Sen. Kalani English to sponsor the legislation after unwanted photos were taken of him last December in Maui.

Twenty-three of the state’s 25 Senate members voted in favor of the bill, which now goes to the House for consideration.

Sen. Sam Slom, the body’s only Republican, opposed the bill. He says the state already has adequate privacy laws and that the state Legislature has been the butt of jokes across the country for its support of the bill.

Sen. Les Ihara also voted against the measure.

THIS IS A BREAKING NEWS UPDATE. Check back soon for further information. AP’s earlier story is below.

The Hawaii state Senate plans to vote Tuesday on the so-called Steven Tyler Act, a bill aimed at protecting celebrities and other public figures from unwanted media attention by creating a civil violation for people who take photos or videos of others’ private moments.

The Aerosmith lead singer from Massachusetts asked Sen. Kalani English to sponsor the bill after photos of Tyler and his girlfriend made news in December, causing family drama.

Tyler owns a multimillion dollar home in Maui, part of English’s district. English said the bill, which was co-sponsored by more than two-thirds of the Senate, could help increase celebrity tourism in Hawaii.

Several other celebrities have also thrown their weight behind the bill, including Britney Spears, Mick Fleetwood and the Osborne family.

But national media organizations worry about the proposal’s impact on freedom of the press. The National Press Photographers Association and the Society of Professional Journalists were some of several national media organizations that submitted testimony opposing the bill.

The Senate Judiciary Committee responded to criticism of the bill’s vague language by replacing the original version with the text of an existing California anti-paparazzi statute.

But longtime media lawyer Jeff Portnoy said the bill is still problematic.

“It’s better, but it doesn’t change its fatal flaws,” he said. The measure’s language is still ambiguous and it is unnecessary, given existing laws, Portnoy said.

Story Continues →