Elections and Politics

Fox Television WFLD-TV v. Progress Illinois

Date: 

11/18/2008

Threat Type: 

Correspondence

Party Receiving Legal Threat: 

Progress Illinois LLC

Type of Party: 

Media Company

Type of Party: 

Organization

Publication Medium: 

Website

Relevant Documents: 

Status: 

Concluded

Disposition: 

Material Removed
Material Reinstated

Description: 

On November 18, 2008, Fox Television sent a letter to YouTube demanding the takedown of a video uploaded by Progress Illinois, an organization that "provides online news and commentary on issues important to Illinois working families and the progressive movement at large."  The video, Beavers On Back-Door Pay Raises, was embedded in a blog post that examined how some Cook County commissioners were using their expense accounts for personal gain and contained a 26-second clip from a FOX Chicago newscast that had aired a week earlier. 

Fox subsequently sent a second letter to YouTube claiming copyright infringement as to two additional videos, Axelrod: Obama Talked to Blagojevich about Senate Seat and Axelrod: "Our Job Is To Come In . . . With Guns Blazing",  that included 1-2 minute clips from an interview conducted with President-Elect Obama's adviser David Axelrod on Fox Chicago Sunday that Progress Illinois embedded in a blog post on its website, Axelrod Comments On Open Senate Seat, D.C. Leadership Vacuum.

On December 10, 2008, YouTube removed the two videos containing clips of the Axelrod interview and, later that day, suspended Progress Illinois YouTube channel "due to repeat copyright offenses."  

On January 5, 2009, Progress Illinois sent a counter-notification to YouTube pursuant to the Digital Millennium Copyright Act, requesting that the three videos be restored and its account reinstated. (Note: lawyer Ben Sheffner at the Copyrights & Campaigns blog comments on some potential deficiencies in Progress Illinois' counter-notification to YouTube.)

Update:

1/12/09 - Progress Illinois, through its counsel Paul Alan Levy at Public Citizen, has stated that it is considering filing a lawsuit against Fox unless it withdraws its copyright objections.

1/29/09 - Progress Illinois' YouTube account has been reinstated.

Jurisdiction: 

Content Type: 

Subject Area: 

Threat Source: 

User Feedback

CMLP Notes: 

from John Bracken

Fox Television Forces Shutdown of Progress Illinois' YouTube Channel

Progress Illinois, which "provides online news and commentary on issues important to Illinois working families and the progressive movement at large," has had its YouTube channel terminated after receiving three notices of copyright infringement from Fox Television Stations, Inc. arising from the organization's use of news footage from WFLD-TV, the Fox affiliate in Chicago. 

Jurisdiction: 

Content Type: 

Subject Area: 

Byrge v. Campfield

Date: 

11/01/2008

Threat Type: 

Lawsuit

Party Receiving Legal Threat: 

Stacey Campfield

Type of Party: 

Individual

Type of Party: 

Individual

Court Type: 

State

Court Name: 

Tennessee District Court, Campbell County

Publication Medium: 

Blog

Status: 

Pending

Description: 

After losing his bid for a seat in the Tennessee House of Representatives, Democratic candidate Roger Byrge sued incumbent Republican Representative Stacey Campfield for libel over statements posted on Campfield's Camp4u blog.

Jurisdiction: 

Content Type: 

Subject Area: 

Threat Source: 

MLRC

News Links

I usually send this out to the CMLP's team of intrepid bloggers to pique their interest, but with the Thanksgiving holiday upon us, I figured I'd avoid the middleman. 

Things that caught my eye this week...

Subject Area: 

Don't Blame The Messenger: Political News Site Faces Defamation Lawsuit By G.O.P. Official

Just because the election is over, it doesn't mean that some of this season's political fights won't continue on in the courts.  Here's one from our legal threats database, Carabelli v. The Michigan Messenger.

Jurisdiction: 

Subject Area: 

Get Out And Vote: Election Day Resources

I am about to head out and vote, but before I do I want to exhort all of our readers who haven't yet voted to GO OUT AND VOTE!  Don't know where to vote?  Go here to find out.  Once you've voted, do your part and upload the details of your experience to one (or all) of the organizations seeking to collect information about this election. 

Jurisdiction: 

Subject Area: 

Brazil v. Roe

Date: 

03/29/2007

Threat Type: 

Lawsuit

Party Issuing Legal Threat: 

Joe Brazil

Party Receiving Legal Threat: 

Jeff Roe

Type of Party: 

Individual

Type of Party: 

Individual

Court Type: 

State

Court Name: 

Missouri 11th Judicial Circuit, Saint Charles County

Case Number: 

0711-CV02429

Legal Counsel: 

David Marcus- Graves Bartle & Marcus

Publication Medium: 

Blog

Status: 

Pending

Disposition: 

Material Removed

Description: 

On March 29, 2007, St. Charles County County Commissioner Joe Brazil filed a defamation lawsuit against political consultant Jeff Roe after Roe published statements on his blog, The Source, claiming that Brazil had been drinking at the time of an accident that killed one of his classmates in 1982. This post appeared days before the Republican primary for the District 2 Missouri State Senate race, in which Brazil was a candidate and lost.

Roe counter-sued Brazil, as well as First Capitol News, LLC, and First Capitol Publications and Photography, LLC. The claim against First Capitol News relates to a March 17, 2007 article published on its website, in which a staff writer referred to Roe's blogging and political activity as "character assasination." For more information, see our database entry, Roe v. First Capitol News.

In January 2008, Roe removed the allegedly defamatory statements from his blog when he purged most of his archives. The lawsuit appears to be ongoing, but we have had difficulty obtaining information about its progress.

UPDATE:

On 12/04/2008 Roe dismissed his counterclaim against Brazil and his 3rd party claim against First Capitol News and First Capitol Publications without prejudice.Brazil's case is ongoing, with the most recent development a 05/06/2009 notice to take the deposition of William Hardin. 

Jurisdiction: 

Content Type: 

Subject Area: 

Threat Source: 

RSS

CMLP Notes: 

AVM - 6/9/09 working on this on Case.net

unfortunately, site is incredibly slow and keeps timing out. some new information but cannot get documents. case is still alive as of 5/6/2009

Priority: 

1-High

Documenting Your Vote: Massachusetts Election Laws

Massachusetts has no statutory provision that specifically prohibits the use of photographic or video equipment inside a polling place while you are voting.  There is, however, a Massachusetts statute that makes it a crime to "hinder[], delay[] or interfere[] with . . .

Jurisdiction: 

Subject Area: 

Georgia Law Prohibits Recording Inside Polling Places

Georgia is one of the states that explicitly prohibit photography inside polling places.  Section 21-2-413(e) of the Georgia Code states:

No elector shall use photographic or other electronic monitoring or recording devices or cellular telephones while such elector is within the enclosed space in a polling place.

This prohibition applies to the entire polling place, not just the voting booth.  Therefore, Georgia voters should not attempt to use a video camera, still camera, or other recording device anywhere inside a polling place.

Jurisdiction: 

Subject Area: 

The Role of Citizen Media in Ensuring Fair Elections

Yesterday, I read an article in the New York Times describing the fears some voters in Duval County, Florida have that their early votes will be lost and never counted.  I found the article deeply disturbing.  It wasn't because it surprised me that people fear their votes won't be counted (that fear has some precedent in Duval County, where 26,000 ballots were discarded in the 2000 election), but because it brought into focus for me the apprehensive feelin

Jurisdiction: 

Subject Area: 

Michigan Secretary of State Warns Voters Not To Use Cameras Inside The Polls

Michigan Secretary of State Terri Lynn Land issued a press release today warning voters that Michigan law prohibits the use of video cameras, still cameras, and other recording devices inside Michigan polling places on Election Day. 

Jurisdiction: 

Subject Area: 

Arkansas: Documenting Your Vote (2008)

NOTE: The information on this page was current as of the 2008 presidential elections, and might not be accurate for later elections. We are retaining this page for historical purposes only. For information related to the 2012 election, visit our revised state-by-state guide.

We have not analyzed in detail the Arkansas laws regulating polling place activities yet, but we received the following communication from a staff attorney in the Arkansas Secretary of State's office:

Documenting Your Vote: North Carolina Election Laws

Although you wouldn't guess from the photograph on the right and others available online (here, here, and here), North Carolina law places heavy restrictions on photography and videography inside polling places on Election Day. Luckily, North Carolina also provides some helpful guidelines on permissible newsgathering activities at the polls.

Section 163-166.3(b) of the North Carolina General Statutes says that no person may "photograph, videotape, or otherwise record the image of any voter within the voting enclosure, except with the permission of both the voter and the chief judge of the precinct." Depending on the attitude of the chief poll worker at your precinct towards photography and videography, this amounts to a near-prohibition on using recording devices inside the "voting enclosure," which means "the room within the voting place that is used for voting."  N.C. Gen. Stat. § 163-165.

Jurisdiction: 

Subject Area: 

Pages

Subscribe to RSS - Elections and Politics