It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
GRANTS PASS, Ore. (AP) — A federal appeals court ruled Friday that bloggers and the public have the same First Amendment protections as journalists when sued for defamation: If the issue is of public concern, plaintiffs have to prove negligence to win damages.
The 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals ordered a new trial in a defamation lawsuit brought by an Oregon bankruptcy trustee against a Montana blogger who wrote online that the court-appointed trustee criminally mishandled a bankruptcy case.
judge Andrew D. Hurwitz wrote. "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."
Xcathdra
reply to post by Wrabbit2000
Some politicians were kicking around the idea of actually creating legislation that would define what a journalist /media member is. That's one option that did not go anywhere, thank god.
PsykoOps
Xcathdra
reply to post by Wrabbit2000
Some politicians were kicking around the idea of actually creating legislation that would define what a journalist /media member is. That's one option that did not go anywhere, thank god.
Funny part of that is that 1st amendment applies to everyone. Media doesn't have any special rights. So in the end it wouldn't even matter.
Piers Morgan via Twitter -
"The 2nd amendment was devised with muskets in mind, not high-powered handguns & assault rifles. Fact."
Carol Roth
"@piersmorgan It was devised 4 people 2b able 2 protect themselves w same type of weaponry used by those from whom they might need protection"
Piers Morgan @piersmorgan
@caroljsroth Where exactly does it say that in the Constitution - must have missed it?
Carol Roth @caroljsroth 3 Dec 2012
@piersmorgan right next to the word "muskets"