Welcome to the Citizen Media Law Brief, a weekly newsletter highlighting recent blog posts, media law news, legal threat entries, and other new content on the Citizen Media Law Project's website. You are receiving this email because you have expressed interest in the CMLP or registered on our site, www.citmedialaw.org. If you do not wish to receive this newsletter, you can unsubscribe by following the link at the bottom of this email or by going to http://www.citmedialaw.org/newsletter/subscriptions.

* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
The latest from the Citizen Media Law Project blog...

Arthur Bright reports that the U.S. government wants foreign dissidents to let their fingers do the tweeting.
The Revolution Will Be Tweeted, Hopes the U.S.

Sam Bayard discusses a case of academic ego gone really wrong.
NYU Law Professor Charged With Criminal Libel in French Court for Refusing to Take Down Critical Book Review

Andrew Moshirnia thinks that "Intenet Freedom" does not mean what the U.S. thinks it means.
The Persian Version: Why Support for ACTA Undermines U.S. Promotion of Internet Freedom

Justin Silverman explains why candidate Joe Walsh isn't likely to be singing "Life's Been Good" any time soon.
Candidate Joe Walsh v. Rocker Joe Walsh: A DMCA Knockout

Sam Bayard tells us that William McVicker can't get a witness.
Pennsylvania Court Refuses to Unmask News Website Commenters

* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
Recent threats added to the CMLP database...

France v. Weiler
Posted March 10, 2010 

O'Malley v. Liner
Posted March 9, 2010

George Logan v. Fred Ross
Posted March 8, 2010

McVicker v. Trib Total Media, Inc.
Posted March 8, 2010

* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
Other citizen media law news...

3rd Circuit Asked to Clarify Student Internet Speech Cases
Law.com - Fri. 03/12/10

Lessig Gives A Well-Timed Speech To The Italian Parliament On Internet Freedom
Techdirt - Thurs. 03/11/10

Hate Blogger Wins Second Mistrial
Wired/Threat Level - Thurs. 03/11/10

Reuters to Journalists: Don't Break News on Twitter
Mashable - Thurs. 03/11/10

Donkey-politician vid keeps two Azerbaijani bloggers in jail
Ars Technica - Wed. 03/10/10

* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
The full(er) Brief...

"Anyone who followed the Green Movement protests in Iran is well aware of the importance of social media to the protesters.  Without Twitter, photo sharing, and other key information-sharing technologies, it's hard to believe that the protests would ever have materialized, let alone in such numbers that the Iranian government couldn't discretely crush them. . . . With the Iran protests in mind, the Treasury Department's decision this week to loosen export restrictions on social media services to Iran, Cuba, and Sudan is really no surprise.  Indeed, The New York Times writes that the regulatory change has been in the works for a while. . . . Although not expressly banned, offering this sort of media technology to Iran, Cuba, and Sudan was of sufficiently ambiguous legality that companies simply abstained from doing so.  Now they've gotten the green light, so hopefully they'll start cranking out IM apps in Farsi and the like. . . ."
Arthur Bright, The Revolution Will Be Tweeted, Hopes the U.S.

"Many others already have written about the worrisome case of Professor Weiler, an NYU law professor who is being haled before a French criminal court to answer for the 'crime' of hosting an academic book review that displeased the author of the book in question. I'll add my voice to the chorus because Professor Weiler's appeal for assistance (below) deserves the widest possible dissemination, and because the case is another object lesson on the importance of legal protection for intermediaries in preserving some modicum of freedom of expression online. When it comes to promoting a free and open environment for online speech, Professor Weiler may not be on the same level as Google, convicted in an Italian court for displaying a user-generated video, but he is nonetheless being targeted for hosting another's speech, and his case could have a serious impact on sharing of academic expression online. If Professor Weiler can be held criminally liable in a foreign country for publishing this book review, I foresee a serious chilling effect on the willingness of others to provide an online platform for this important form of academic discourse going forward. . . . It's also a classic example of so-called 'libel tourism,' which some states have moved to address. . . ."
Sam Bayard, NYU Law Professor Charged With Criminal Libel in French Court for Refusing to Take Down Critical Book Review

"If mental gymnastics were an Olympic event, the United States would be guaranteed gold. Our prowess at Doublethink is indisputable. The latest example of our mental contortion: (A) Internet Freedom is essential for the protection of basic human rights and (B) Access to the Internet is not a right and may be taken away without due process. At the same time as the United States is trying to increase Internet freedom in Iran, the United States Trade Representative is negotiating a copyright treaty (in secret) that will reduce Internet access both at home and abroad. This will not end well. . . . There can be no right to the Internet if a person’s access to the Internet can be destroyed on such a flimsy pretense. Under the ACTA theory of the world, Iran would be justified in blocking all peer-to-peer (P2P) sharing or even social networking, so long as the regime claimed that these digital tools encouraged copyright infringement. The same could hold for Twitter: it could be used for sharing copyrighted lyrics. (Sorry Iran, Japan's JASRAC got to that logic gem first.) . . ."
Andrew Moshirnia, The Persian Version: Why Support for ACTA Undermines U.S. Promotion of Internet Freedom

"After a month of snarky letter and email exchanges, Republican U.S. Congressional candidate Joe Walsh recently removed a campaign video from his website that used a song by the Eagles band member also named Joe Walsh. Candidate Walsh called the copyright controversy 'a distraction' in late January but vowed that he was 'not backing down on this.' Ultimately, though, he did. . . . The campy video features musician and political supporter Joe Cantafio performing his take on the 1971 classic 'Walk Away.' Cantafio used the same, or substantially similar, music from the song to create 'Lead the Way,' an ode to Walsh’s campaign. When Walsh the Rocker found out a Republican used his music as part of a campaign video, an entertaining—though misguided—discussion on copyright law began. . . . Once informed of Candidate Walsh's video, Rocker Walsh issued takedown demands to YouTube made possible through provisions in the Digital Millennium Copyright Act, 17 U.S.C. § 512. Candidate Walsh insisted the video is an example of fair use. Because the song features new lyrics, it does stand in contrast to previous high-profile legal bouts between the Foo Fighters and John McCain or Don Henley and Republican Charles DeVore. But the fair use defense in this case is still questionable. . . ."
Justin Silverman, Candidate Joe Walsh v. Rocker Joe Walsh: A DMCA Knockout

"Thomas O'Toole at TechLaw points us to an anonymous speech decision issued last week by a federal court in Pennsylvania.  In McVicker v. King, William McVicker subpoenaed Trib Total Media, publisher of the South Hills Record and YourSouthHills.com, for 'information that would disclose the true identities' of the users of seven identified screen names. McVicker, the plaintiff in an employment discrimination case, sought the identities of the posters in order to impeach the testimony of city council members who made the decision to fire him.  The United States District Court for the Western District of Pennsylvania denied McVicker's motion to compel the newspaper to turn over identifying information. The case presents a different posture from most cases dealing with the First Amendment right to anonymous speech because McVicker wanted to unmask the posters in order to make them witnesses in his case, not to make them defendants (e.g.s, the Liskula Cohen saga, Swartz v. Does, Solers, Inc. v. Doe, and Independent Newspapers, Inc. v. Brodie).  Given this posture, the ordinary test for unmasking a commenter—whether the plaintiff has made 'a substantial legal and factual showing that the claims have merit'—is not appropriate. . . ."
Sam Bayard, Pennsylvania Court Refuses to Unmask News Website Commenters

* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
Join the conversation...

Can't get enough of the Citizen Media Law Project? Join us on Twitter, Facebook, and YouTube!