After reading Chapter 7 on torts, including the Biblical Worldview analyses and the discussions of duty, address the question in the Point/Counterpoint at the end of the chapter: Should the creators of violent media owe a duty of care to victims of crimes based on violent media?

Consider this question from the perspective of the owners and managers of companies that produce video games or other electronic entertainment (movies, TV, streaming content, music, etc.) that contain such violent content.

Title your thread "Duty" or "No Duty" to indicate your conclusion.

The student will first post a thread of at least seven hundred words (content, not including references) with a minimum of six scholarly sources other than the course textbook and provided materials.

Case Opener: Plastic Surgeon Defamation FACTS Dr. Walter Sullivan was one of several plastic surgeons in Las Vegas visited by Julie Jones Jones, an exotic dancer, sought plastic surgery to improve her ability to make money in her profession After visiting Sullivan, she visited Dr. Joseph Bongiovi Jr. oDuring her consultation, Jones mentioned her earlier visit with Sullivan oBongiovi told her than Sullivan had a patient die the previous week during the same procedure Jones sough oBongiovi told her the death was the direct result of Sullivan's negligence Despite the allegations, Jones saw Sullivan again and scheduled the surgery On the basis of the confirmation from Bongiovi, Jones called to cancel her appointment with Sullivan When Sullivan's office manager asked why, Jones mentioned that Sullivan was under investigation for a patient's death When Sullivan learned of the cancellation, he called Jones to find out why she made the statements; he was unsuccessful in obtaining a name After speaking with Sullivan, Jones called Bongiovi's office to receive confirmation about the allegation; Biogiovi's assistant confirmed the statements When Sullivan learned the identity of Bongiovi, he filed suit for defamation oAccording to Sullivan, statements were slanderous per se oAt the conclusion of a trial, a jury found in favor of Sullivan and awarded him $250,000 in compensatory damages and $250,000 in punitive damages oBongiovi appealed, arguing that the jury should have been instructed that actual malice was the standard because Sullivan was a public figure Supreme Court of Nevada held that Sullivan did not qualify as a public figure because he "did not voluntarily interject himself into a public (medical) controversy" Court found that the awarded compensatory and punitive damages were proper oSullivan had lost income as the result of Bongiovi's statement, and the compensatory damages were equivalent to the income lost oThe punitive-damage ward was reasonable and proportionate to the amount to harm to Sullivan Ultimately, the district court ruling was affirmed in favor of Sullivan.