Week of September 19, 2008 [1]

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...

CMLP Staff announce a recent collaborative effort with Poynter's News University.
CMLP Teams Up With NewsU to Launch Online Media Law Course [2]

Arthur Bright looks at the rationale for and practical implications of the Virginia spam decision.
Virginia Supreme Court: State Anti-Spam Law is Unconstitutional [3]

Sam Bayard gives an update on Senator Lieberman, YouTube, and terrorist videos.
YouTube Changes Guidelines, Senator Lieberman Gets Partial Victory on Terrorist Vidoes [4]

David Ardia revisits the issue of libel tourism.
Libel Tourism: A First Amendment Holiday [5]

Sam Bayard comments on trademark overreaching by a big law firm.
Jones Day Gets Trademark Law Wrong, Squelches Legitimate Reporting [6]

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

Florida Bar v. Conway [7]
Posted September 19, 2008

Sachay v. Coconate [8]
Posted September 17, 2008

Puntarelli v. Does [9]
Posted September 17, 2008

Tilghman v. Albero [10]
Posted September 17, 2008

Silver v. Lavandeira [11]
Posted September 16, 2008

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

Federal lawsuits take on the humble hyperlink
Ars Technica [12] - Thurs. 9/18/08

Grisham Libel Suit Tossed
The Legal Satyricon [13] - Thurs. 9/18/08

State of the First Amendment
The Blog of Legal Times [14] - Thurs. 09/18/08

NYU Professor Stifles Blogging, Twittering by Journalism Student
MediaShift [15] - Wed. 09/17/08

On Students, MySpace, and the First Amendment
Wall Street Journal Law Blog [16] - Tues. 9/16/08

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

"We're pleased to announce that News University launched its Online Media Law course today.  The course is specifically designed for individuals and journalists engaged in online publishing, and it covers three important areas of media law -- defamation, privacy, and copyright. The course is free. Students can enroll online at the NewsU site and take the course at their own pace.  CMLP Director David Ardia co-authored the course with Geanne Rosenberg, Chair of the Department of Journalism and the Writing Professions at City University of New York’s Baruch College. . . ."
CMLP Staff, CMLP Teams Up With NewsU to Launch Online Media Law Course [2]

"It looks like Jeremy Jaynes, the first person in the United States to be convicted of a felony for spamming, is going to get a free pass, thanks to a decision handed down by the Virginia Supreme Court last week striking down Virginia's anti-spam law, Va. Code Ann. § 18.2-152.3:1, on First Amendment grounds. . .  But even if the Times' simile is apt, it's hard to argue with the court's determination that the statute is overbroad.  The Virginian-Pilot approved of the court's decision and chastised the state legislature for passing such a flawed law.  In its editorial, The Virginian-Pilot wrote that 'It should not be that difficult to craft a law that targets shysters peddling questionable get-rich-quick schemes without entangling the Founding Fathers.' . . ."
Arthur Bright, Virginia Supreme Court: State Anti-Spam Law is Unconstitutional [3]

"Taking full advantage of the seventh anniversary of 9/11, YouTube announced changes to its community guidelines last week, prohibiting the upload of videos inciting others to commit violent acts.  The change comes several months after Senator Joe Lieberman pressured YouTube to remove videos not only inciting violence, but also content 'that can be readily identified as produced by Al-Qaeda or another [Foreign Terrorist Organization].' . . .  As I argued in a previous post, this kind of viewpoint discrimination is inconsistent with our nation's free speech norms (not the law -- remember YouTube is a private actor) and makes us look like hypocrites in the eyes of the world.  Thankfully, YouTube doesn't appear willing to follow Lieberman down that road. . . . "
Sam Bayard, YouTube Changes Guidelines, Senator Lieberman Gets Partial Victory on Terrorist Vidoes [4]

"Over the past few months, I've blogged several times (see here and here) about the proposed federal Free Speech Protection Act of 2008, which would allow a federal court to enjoin the enforcement in the United States of a foreign libel judgment if the speech at issue would not constitute defamation under U.S. law.  'Libel tourism' describes the practice of libel plaintiffs who pursue claims against American publishers in foreign courts that offer few, if any, of the protections for speech available in the United States. . . .  As I've noted in the past, this is an important issue for both traditional publishers, who are increasingly moving to online distribution, and citizen media, who already use the Internet to reach audiences all over the world, including in countries that don't have adequate free speech protections. Let's hope that Congress acts quickly on this. . . ."
David Ardia, Libel Tourism: A First Amendment Holiday [5]

"Paul Alan Levy of Public Citizen published a fantastic post on Friday about big law firm Jones Day's lawsuit against BlockShopper.com, an online real estate news website covering Chicago, South Florida, Las Vegas, and St. Louis. The website reports on what's happening in the local real estate markets -- who's buying, who's selling, where, what price, etc.  It focuses on fancy neighborhoods where lawyers and other professionals frequently buy homes and often mentions the professional affiliations of the buyers and sellers.  The lawsuit arose out of BlockShopper's reports on two condominium purchases by Jones Day associates Dan Malone Jr. and Jacob Tiedt.  In the reports, BlockShopper used Jones Day's trademark (its name) to identify the law firm as Malone and Tiedt's employer and linked from each associate's name to their biographies on the firm's website (here and here).  Levy aptly characterizes the absurdity of Jones Day's claims . . .  I would add that BlockShopper's use of the Jones Day trademark is a classic 'nominative fair use.' . . ."
Sam Bayard, Jones Day Gets Trademark Law Wrong, Squelches Legitimate Reporting [6]