## Facts

- William James Sidis was widely publicized as a child prodigy; he lectured on advanced mathematics at age eleven and graduated from Harvard at sixteen amid intense public attention.
- As an adult, Sidis sought to live privately and to avoid further public exposure.
- *The New Yorker*, published by F‑R Publishing Corporation, ran a “Where Are They Now?” profile about Sidis, with later references in a subsequent issue and a newspaper advertisement promoting the earlier issue.
- The profile recounted Sidis’s early fame, later breakdown, retreat from public life, and described aspects of his current living conditions, habits, work, and manner of speech.
- The publication included a small cartoon depicting Sidis lecturing as a child.
- Sidis did not claim the article was false; he alleged the publication of intimate, unflattering details violated his privacy and statutory rights.

## Issues

1. Whether truthful publication of intimate details about the later life of a former public figure, presented as a newsworthy “where are they now” story, states an actionable invasion of privacy under the common-law doctrines invoked.
2. Whether use of Sidis’s name and a cartoon depiction in an editorial feature, and an advertisement promoting the issue containing that feature, constitutes use “for advertising purposes or for the purposes of trade” under N.Y. Civil Rights Law §§ 50–51.

## Decision

- The Second Circuit affirmed dismissal of the privacy-based claims.
- The court held the complaint did not allege a sufficiently extreme intrusion to support a privacy claim where the publication concerned a subject of continuing public interest and was concededly truthful.
- The court held N.Y. Civil Rights Law §§ 50–51 were not violated because the use of Sidis’s identity occurred in an editorial feature and incidental promotion of that feature, not as commercial advertising or trade use within the statute.

## Legal Principles

- A common-law privacy claim is limited by the public’s interest in news and commentary; truthful reporting on matters of legitimate public concern is generally not actionable, even if embarrassing.
- A person who has become a public figure may remain a proper subject of later reporting concerning what became of him, so long as the publication remains within the bounds of legitimate public interest rather than purely prurient intrusion.
- N.Y. Civil Rights Law §§ 50–51 target unauthorized commercial exploitation of a person’s name or likeness; ordinary editorial content, including illustrated features, is not “advertising” or “trade” use merely because it may increase circulation.
- Promotion of a publication by referencing that it contains an editorial story about an individual is generally incidental to protected editorial use and does not, without more, create statutory liability.

## Conclusion

The court held that a truthful magazine profile recounting the later life of a formerly famous prodigy was protected as newsworthy editorial content and did not amount to an actionable privacy invasion or an unauthorized advertising/trade use under New York’s statutory scheme.


Sidis v. F-R Publ'g Corp., 113 F.2d 806 (2d Cir. 1940)