Month of July 2011 [1]
Welcome to the Citizen Media Law Brief, a monthly 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.
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
News from the Citizen Media Law Project...
The Citizen Media Law Project joined The Reporters Committee for Freedom of the Press and a number of other journalism organizations in filing an amicus brief [2] in the Second Circuit in Baker v. Goldman Sachs & Co. The case involves an important reporters privilege issue: the plaintiff, in his suit against Goldman, seeks a subpoena in order to uncover a Wall Street Journal reporter's sources and unpublished work product. The amicus brief argues that the reporter, Jesse Eisinger, should not have to reveal his unpublished Goldman-related information because such subpoenas threaten the independence and integrity of news media.
CMLP also announced [3] a new online legal course, titled Newsgathering Law & Liability: A Guide for Reporting [4], through Poynter's News University [5]. The free course, co-authored by David Ardia and Geanne Rosenberg, walks participants through some of the most pressing issues facing citizen-journalists (and anyone else who gathers information) in the modern media environment.
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
The latest from the Citizen Media Law Project blog...
Timothy Lamoureux has a first-hand report of the First Circuit oral arguments in Glik v. Cunniffe, a case focusing on the right to record in public.
First Circuit Hears Argument on Right to Record in Public [6]
Brittany Griffin Smith considers the problems of civic journalism in the 21st century, as illustrated by Gannett's latest round of layoffs.
The Stumbling Giant That is Big Journalism [7]
John Sharkey ponders the plight of Joseph Rakofsky, the man who sued The Internet.
The SLAPP-Happy Story of Rakofsky v. Internet [8]
Andrew Moshirnia compares the Justice Breyer of Brown v EMA, the recent video-game case, to the Justice Breyer of Holder v. Humanitarian Law Project.
A Tale of Two Breyers [9]
Eric P. Robinson criticizes the idea that bloggers and traditional journalists should have different advertising-disclosure requirements.
FTC Looks to Revise Online Advertising Guide [10]
Andrew Moshirnia runs down a new UN report on Internet access-as-human-right.
UN Disapproves of Three Strikes Digital Executions [11]
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
Recent threats added to the CMLP database...
Righthaven LLC v. BuzzFeed, Inc. [12]
Posted June 15, 2011
Rakofsky v. The Internet [13]
Posted June 15, 2011
Barclays Capital v. TheFlyOnTheWall.com [14]
Posted June 21, 2011
Façonnable USA Corp. v. John Does 1-10 [15]
Posted June 29, 2011
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
Other media law news and commentary...
Anonymity has value, in comments and elsewhere
Gigaom.com [16] - Mon. 6/20/11
Venture Capitalists Speak Out Against the PROTECT IP Act
HollywoodReporter.com [17] - Fri. 6/24/11
First Amendment Veterans Weigh in on Free Speech in the Roberts Court
The Blog of LegalTimes [18] - Mon. 6/20/11
People Realizing New Anti-Streaming Criminal Copyright Bill Could Mean Jail Time For Lip Synchers
TechDirt [19] - Fri. 6/10/11
The Hale Case: What's Good for Old-Guard Journalists May Not Be Good for Bloggers
Blog Law Blog [20] - Fri. 6/10/11
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
The full(er) Brief...
"On October 1, 2007, plaintiff Simon Glik was arrested under the Massachusetts wiretap act . . . as well as for aiding the escape of a prisoner and disturbing the peace, after he used his cell phone to create an audiovisual recording of three police officers arresting a suspect on Boston Common. . . . Glik, with the assistance of the ACLU, then filed suit against the officers and the City of Boston, asserting claims under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 and the Massachusetts Civil Rights Act as well as a claim for malicious prosecution. The civil rights claims are premised on violation of Glik’s Fourth Amendment right not to be placed under false arrest (alleging a lack of probable cause to believe that he was engaged in “secret” recording) and his First Amendment right to record police activity on public ground. . . . [The First Circuit panel] appeared ready to engage with the constitutional issues, expressing concern that a constitutional right [to record public officials] could never be clearly established if the courts did not address the existence of the right because of a lack of clarity. . . ."
Timothy Lamoureux, First Circuit Hears Argument on Right to Record in Public [6]
"Seven hundred people who contributed to the production of news every day no longer have a job; many may have no income, period. . . . Really, the problem we're facing as an industry [journalism] is that of a particular medium in its death throes — and that medium is one we've grown accustomed to delivering needed content. . . . Hopefully, the devotees to civic journalism will find a new arena in the Internet, which has empowered the little guy with cheap, easy publishing. . . . And if they do, we should all be grateful — figuring out how to make money online isn't easy, and those who do swim through legal quicksand to get there. Luckily pro bono attorneys, such as the members of the Online Media Legal Network, recognize this and are there to help, and journalism foundations continue finding grant money to support journalism entrepreneurship. . . ."
Brittany Griffin Smith, The Stumbling Giant That is Big Journalism [7]
"In short: Man represents defendant in murder trial; judge declares mistrial; judge says scathing things about man's professional competence; newspaper covers the unusual mistrial; law bloggers pick up story; man brings 75-defendant lawsuit against everybody who wrote about him. . . . It's easy to have fun with the case, in large part because none of the defendants are really in any danger -- the defendants that aren't lawyers themselves are mostly big media companies, who can more-than-capably handle themselves when faced with a lawsuit. . . . Had this been, say, the education blogosphere instead of the blawgosphere, defendants would be scrambling to figure out how (and whether they need) to get a lawyer, whether there's any relevant anti-SLAPP help (hint: the New York law ain't it), whether they should just settle, and so on. . . ."
John Sharkey, The SLAPP-Happy Story of Rakofsky v. Internet [8]
"So, the video game case came down today, Brown v. EMA. First off, a tip of the hat to SCOTUS for A) coming out the right way and declaring California's violent video games for minors ban unconstitutional and B) reaching the actual merits, rather than settling on the fairly obvious vagueness concerns. But the 7 - 2 still leaves me a little puzzled, mainly for Justice Breyer's dissent. . . . To sum up: Justice Breyer in [Holder v. Humanitarian Law Project] strongly implies that nothing or almost nothing survives Strict Scrutiny in the Speech context, but then he goes on [in his Brown v. EMA dissent] to apply SS and uphold a (in this writer's ever so humble opinion) really crappy statute. Where have you gone Justice Breyer, the nation turns its lonely eyes to you, whoo whoo whoo. . . ."
Andrew Moshirnia, A Tale of Two Breyers [9]
"[The FTC] did address social media in its "Guides Concerning the Use of Endorsements and Testimonials in Advertising," and declared that bloggers and other social media posters who comment favorably on a product or service must disclose if they have received any compensation for that comment, including freebies or discounts. But the Commission added that "bloggers may be subject to different disclosure requirements than reviewers in the traditional media." As justification for this, the Commission stated that freebies and discounts for traditional news reporters are "reasonably expected by the audience," while such benefits for bloggers, Twitterers and other social media are not. . . . If, as the FTC stated in 2000, "fraud and deception are unlawful no matter what the medium," then the Commission's rules regarding fraudulent and deceptive advertising should apply equally to all types of media organizations, online and off."
Eric P. Robinson, FTC Looks to Revise Online Advertising Guide [10]
"In essence, the [Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement] looks like an attempt to institute a wide swath of changes related to intellectual property without all that pesky legislation, public comment, etc. This black cauldron has birthed all sorts of interesting horrors (dramatic much?) but perhaps the most terrifying is the specter of three-strikes internet termination policies. . . . So my heart grew three sizes when I read that a UN report on Human Rights soundly denounced any automatic Internet termination plan. . . . The report ends on a pleasing Falcon Punch, calling for the repeal of any existing IP laws "which permit users to be disconnected from Internet access." I doubt ACTA's drafters will be moved by this plea, but hey, a boy can dream. . . ."
Andrew Moshirnia, UN Disapproves of Three Strikes Digital Executions [11]
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
A note from the CMLP Staff...
You might have noticed that it has been a while since the last issue of the Citizen Media Law Brief. We are in the midst of a series of exciting transitions here at the CMLP, with new staff, new projects and few new ideas that we'll let you in on as they develop. For that reason, we have revived our newsletter in order to keep you better informed about our activities. We thank you for your continued interest in the CMLP and look forward to speaking to you again in the future!
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
Join the conversation...
Can't get enough of the Citizen Media Law Project? Join us on Twitter, Facebook [21], YouTube [22], and Delicious [23]!
