OUT OF MIND
Would you like to react to this message? Create an account in a few clicks or log in to continue.
Latest topics
» EUDRA Adverse Reaction Stats Through October 9th, 2021
Federal Court: Bloggers have First Amendment Protection EmptyToday at 11:43 am by PurpleSkyz

» OH GREAT THEY’RE PUTTING GUNS ON ROBODOGS NOW
Federal Court: Bloggers have First Amendment Protection EmptyToday at 11:24 am by PurpleSkyz

» The Needle and the Damage Done
Federal Court: Bloggers have First Amendment Protection EmptyToday at 11:08 am by PurpleSkyz

» William Shatner ‘overwhelmed by sadness’ while discussing spaceflight
Federal Court: Bloggers have First Amendment Protection EmptyToday at 3:18 am by PurpleSkyz

» Unearthed video shows Fauci, health experts discussing ‘China’ virus, global vaccines weeks before COVID hit
Federal Court: Bloggers have First Amendment Protection EmptyToday at 2:25 am by PurpleSkyz

» 138 Legislators From 38 States Sign “New Declaration Of Independence” – AZ State Sen. Wendy Rogers
Federal Court: Bloggers have First Amendment Protection EmptyToday at 2:16 am by PurpleSkyz

» FDA Delays Moderna for Young Teens Pending Investigation into Heart Inflammation Side Effect
Federal Court: Bloggers have First Amendment Protection EmptyToday at 2:12 am by PurpleSkyz

» WILLY MYCO'S $100,000.00 (100k) CHALLENGE TO ANJALI
Federal Court: Bloggers have First Amendment Protection EmptyYesterday at 7:30 pm by PurpleSkyz

» Tyson: 'when the aliens come, we'll all know'
Federal Court: Bloggers have First Amendment Protection EmptyYesterday at 12:05 pm by PurpleSkyz

» Mystery boom and unexplained rumblings freak out people in New Hampshire
Federal Court: Bloggers have First Amendment Protection EmptyYesterday at 11:58 am by PurpleSkyz

» Does The Sun Have An Evil Twin?
Federal Court: Bloggers have First Amendment Protection EmptyYesterday at 11:50 am by PurpleSkyz

» Australia Introduces $5000 Fines for the Unvaxxed
Federal Court: Bloggers have First Amendment Protection EmptyYesterday at 11:39 am by PurpleSkyz

» Navy Announces Plans To Expel Those Refusing Covid Vaccine, Revoke Benefits
Federal Court: Bloggers have First Amendment Protection EmptyYesterday at 11:35 am by PurpleSkyz

» VAERS: 160,000+ Americans Have Likely Died From COVID-19 Injections
Federal Court: Bloggers have First Amendment Protection EmptyYesterday at 11:31 am by PurpleSkyz

» LOFAR Detects Coherent Radio Emission from 19 Red Dwarfs
Federal Court: Bloggers have First Amendment Protection EmptyYesterday at 11:07 am by PurpleSkyz

» Breaking: U.S. Dept. of Defense Data Shatters Official COVID Narrative!
Federal Court: Bloggers have First Amendment Protection EmptyYesterday at 11:03 am by PurpleSkyz

» Full Facts & Figures from Doctors & Scientists On COVID19
Federal Court: Bloggers have First Amendment Protection EmptyYesterday at 11:00 am by PurpleSkyz

» Worst Oil Spill In “Decades”, May Take “Years” To Clean Up
Federal Court: Bloggers have First Amendment Protection EmptyYesterday at 10:55 am by PurpleSkyz

» Jon Rappoport - Mandate or Freedom: An open letter to corporate CEOs
Federal Court: Bloggers have First Amendment Protection EmptyYesterday at 10:44 am by PurpleSkyz

» Chicago Set to Lose 50% or More of Police Force at Midnight Tonight as Police Union Calls Mayor’s Bluff on Reporting COVID-19 Vaccine Status plus MORE
Federal Court: Bloggers have First Amendment Protection EmptyYesterday at 10:33 am by PurpleSkyz

You are not connected. Please login or register

OUT OF MIND » THE INSANITY OF REALITY » GOVERNMENT & THE NEW WORLD ORDER » Federal Court: Bloggers have First Amendment Protection

Federal Court: Bloggers have First Amendment Protection

2 posters

Go down  Message [Page 1 of 1]

PurpleSkyz

PurpleSkyz
Admin
Federal Court: Bloggers have First Amendment Protection
Posted by Xeno on January 18, 2014
A federal appeals court has ruled that bloggers and the general public have the same protection of the First Amendment as journalists when sued for defamation. Should the issue be of public concern, the claimant has to prove negligence to win the case.
“It’s not a special right to the news media,” he said. “So it’s a good thing for bloggers and citizen journalists and others,” Gregg Leslie, of the Reporters Committee for the Freedom of the Press, told AP.
The federal court’s ruling came after a new trial in a defamation case: an Oregon bankruptcy trustee was the plaintiff against a Montana blogger who wrote on the Internet that the trustee criminally mishandled a bankruptcy case.
In 2011, Crystal Cox, a blogger from Montana was sued by attorney Kevin Padrick and his company, Obsidian Finance Group LLC, following her posts disclosing the alleged fraud, corruption, money-laundering and other criminal activities carried out by Obsidian. It should be noted that Padrick is not a public figure, so the facts exposed by Cox couldn’t inflict reputational damage on him.
Padrick and Obsidian won the case, and were granted $2.5 million.
Cox addressed the court of appeals, and was joined by UCLA law professor Eugene Volokh, who found out about her case and offered her to represent her as an attorney in court.
“Because Cox’s blog post addressed a matter of public concern, even assuming that Gertz is limited to such speech, the district court should have instructed the jury that it could not find Cox liable for defamation unless it found that she acted negligently,” Judge Andrew Hurwitz wrote for a three-judge panel of the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals.
“We hold that liability for a defamatory blog post involving a matter of public concern cannot be imposed without proof of fault and actual damages,” he added.
Eugene Volokh, who wrote an article on the issue, stated that the case ensures that bloggers have the same First Amendment rights as professional media workers.
“There had been similar precedents before concerning advocacy groups, other writers and book authors. This follows a fairly well established chain of precedents. I believe it is the first federal appeals court level ruling that applies to bloggers,” Volokh said.
The plaintiff, however, disagreed with the decision and was disappointed with the ruling.
“Ms. Cox’s false and defamatory statements have caused substantial damage to our clients, and we are evaluating our options with respect to the court’s decision,” AP reported Steven Wilker, an attorney for Obsidian and Padrick, as saying.
The issue of defining the term “journalist” has been on the table for a long time.
In 1974, the Gertz v. Robert Welch Inc. case marked the beginning of the debate on the level of state protection for public or private figures.
In September 2013, the US Senate committee voted 13-to-5 early Thursday to approve S.987, a bill meant to protect members of the press from government intrusion and “maintain the free flow of information to the public.”
The legislation covered bloggers and freelancers both paid and unpaid who work with the “primary intent to investigate events and procure material in order to disseminate to the public news or information.”
I was named in a lawsuit based on defamatory statements someone left in comments on my blog. Luckily, I have good lawyers and so does Automattic, Inc. the company that owns WordPress.
We have a right and a duty to share negative factual information that is of public concern. How else can we improve the world?
Of course, on the other side of the coin, bloggers need to learn and do fact checking. Know your sources and check facts before posting something negative of public concern.


Thanks to: http://xenophilius.wordpress.com



  

Herb Lady

Herb Lady
Thanks Purpleskyz!



Take care of the land and the animals and they will take care of you!

Come visit my site at:  https://onlynaturesmagic.com/

Back to top  Message [Page 1 of 1]

Permissions in this forum:
You cannot reply to topics in this forum