Obsidian Finance Group v. Cox

UPDATE: Appeals Court overturns decision against blogger.


9th.Cir.: Appeals Court Overturns Defamation Award Against Blogger
Los Angeles Times
An appeals court unanimously overturned a defamation award against a blogger Friday, ruling that 1st Amendment protections for traditional news media extend to individuals posting on the web.
http://www.latimes.com/local/la-me-blogger-1st-amendment-20140118%2C0%2C3524030.story#axzz2qxac8PR6


Opinion: http://cdn.ca9.uscourts.gov/datastore/opinions/2014/01/17/12-35238.pdf




UPDATE: District Court affirm original decisions, finding Cox liable for $2.5 million in damages.

D.Ore.: Investigative Blogger Must Pay $2.5 Million
Courthouse News Service
A self-described investigative blogger must pay a financial company $2.5 million for a single post in which she accused it of tax fraud, after a federal judge refused to grant her request for a new trial.
http://www.courthousenews.com/2012/03/29/45154.htm

>>Opinion: Obsidian Finance Group v. Cox
 http://www.courthousenews.com/2012/03/29/CoxOrder.pdf

 
STATUS: Jury found Cox liable for defamation in December of 2011. The EFF filed a brief to reinstate the case on January 11, 2012.

Ore. Dist.: Oregon Defamation Decision Could Chill Free Speech
Electronic Frontier Foundation
The Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF) urged an Oregon district court in a friend-of-the court brief to overturn a multi-million dollar defamation verdict against a blogger that could chill free speech.
https://www.eff.org/press/releases/oregon-defamation-decision-could-chill-free-speech

>>Amicus Brief: Obsidian Finance Group v. Cox
https://www.eff.org/sites/default/files/filenode/coxamicus.pdf

Too Much Media, LLC v. Hale, No. L2736-08 (N.J. Super. 2008).

This summary is not available. Please click here to view the post.

Mead v. Gaston Gazette

N.C. court won’t force newspaper to I.D. online commentator
The Associated Press
Gaston County Superior Court Judge Calvin Murphy ruled the Gaston Gazette did not have to tell the attorney for a murder suspect who a commentator was on an article about the case.
http://www.firstamendmentcoalition.org/2010/08/n-c-court-wont-force-newspaper-to-i-d-online-commentator/

See also:



North Carolina Superior Court Holds State Shield Law Protects Identities of Newspaper Website Commenters
Newsroom Law Blog
http://www.newsroomlawblog.com/2010/08/articles/shield-laws/north-carolina-superior-court-holds-state-shield-law-protects-identities-of-newspaper-website-commenters/?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+NewsroomLawBlog+%28Newsroom+Law+Blog%29&utm_content=Bloglines

N.C. Super.: Ruling upholds online confidentiality

Charlotte Observer

News organizations would not be forced to give up the identities of online commenters on news articles, according to a pre-motion ruling in Gaston County Superior Court this week.

http://www.charlotteobserver.com/2010/07/31/1593029/ruling-upholds-confidentiality.html#ixzz0vSUcz6GS

In re Grand Jury Proceedings; Joshua Wolf, No. 06-90064 (N.D. Cal. Aug. 1, 2006)
Status: After being jailed for 226 days for contempt, blogger was released after agreeing to post material on his web site

A protest on July 8, 2005 in San Francisco tied to a meeting of world leaders in Scotland, turned violent, with a police officer assaulted and suffering a fractured skull. There was also an alleged “potential attempted arson” of a San Francisco city police car. Since the police car had been purchased with federal funds, a federal grand jury began investigating whether a federal crime had been committed. During the course of its investigation, federal law enforcement learned that videoblogger and freelance journalist Joshua Wolf had videotaped portions of the protest, and posted portions of his footage on his website and sold a video clip to Indymedia, NBC, and television stations KTVU and KRON. On Feb. 1, 2006, Wolf was served with a grand jury subpoena ordering him to appear before the grand jury with all his footage. Wolf refused, and on Aug. 1, 2006, the District Court for the Northern District of California ordered that he be held in civil contempt and jailed for his refusal to produce the footage that had not already been shown. Wolf appealed the district court’s contempt order in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit, which affirmed the contempt order on Sept. 8, 2006. Wolf v. U.S., No. 06-16403, 2006 WL 2631398 (9th Cir. Sept. 8, 2006) (O’Scannlain, Graber, Clifton, JJ.). On April 3, 2007, Wolf was released after he agreed to post the video online, thus making it available to prosecutors, as long as he was not required to testify before the grand jury.

Links and Court Documents:
Court documents available at http://www.medialaw.org/Content/NavigationMenu/Hot_Topics/Reporters_Privilege/Wolf/Wolf.htm

Apple Computer, Inc. v. Doe, No. 1-04-CV-032178, 20005 WL 578641, 33 Media L. Rep. 1449 (Cal. Super. Mar. 11, 2005) (granting discovery motion), rev’d sub. nom. O'Grady, et al. v. Super. Ct. of Santa Clara County , 139 Cal.App.4th 1423, 44 Cal.Rptr.3d 72, 34 Media L. Rep. 208 (Cal. App. 6th Dist. May 26, 2006).
Status: Discovery motion denied; lawsuit against alleged leakers withdrawn

In Dec. 2004, Apple Computer, Inc., filed suit against numerous unknown entities in connection with the leak of confidential information prior to the release of an Apple product codenamed "Asteroid." The information, which Apple claims are trade secrets, was posted on a number of websites, including AppleInsider (http://www.appleinsider.com/) and PowerPage (http://www.powerpage.org/). Apple sued the unknown people who leaked the information. In an attempt to determine who these people were, Apple subpoenaed Nfox, the e-mail service provider for PowerPage, seeking e-mail messages that could identify the source(s) of the leaked information. The trial court ruled that Apple is entitled to subpoena an e-mail provider to try and identify the source(s), but declined to determine whether the bloggers qualified as journalists under the California shield law. But the Court of Appeals reversed, holding that bloggers and webmasters have the same protections against divulging confidential sources as traditional media. In July 2006, Apple announced that it would not appeal the ruling; in January 2007, Apple withdrew the case.

Links and Court Documents:
Docket available at: http://www.sccaseinfo.org/
Case information and updates: http://www.eff.org/Censorship/Apple_v_Does/
Cal. App. decision at http://www.eff.org/Censorship/Apple_v_Does/H028579.pdf

Garrett v. Better Publications, Civil No. CL08000197-00 (Va. Cir. Ct., Buckingham Co. subpoena to blogger Jan. 15, 2009).
Status: Subpeona pending.

In December 2008, Thomas Garrett sued The Hook weekly newspaper for its coverage of a state criminal case against him. The filing of the lawsuit was covered by various newspapers and blogs, including the cvillenews.com blog, which focuses on community news in Charlottesville, Va. Garrett then subpoenaed blogger Waldo Jaquith, seeking information used to write the blog’s article on the lawsuit, and the identity and IP addresses of all commenters to and viewers of the article. Jaquith has filed a motion to quash the subpoena, and has invoked Virginia’s reporter’s privilege.

Links and Court Documents:
http://www.citmedialaw.org/blog/2009/virginia-blogger-targeted-outrageous-subpoena
http://waldo.jaquith.org/blog/2009/01/motion-to-quash/
http://www.rcfp.org/newsitems/index.php?i=9996
http://www.citizen.org/litigation/forms/cases/CaseDetails.cfm?cID=524

Doe v. TS et al., No. CV08030693 (Ore. Cir. Ct., Clackamas ruling Sept. 30, 2008)
Status: Subpeona seeking release of release information on blog poster denied

The weekly newspaper Portland Mercury hosts a blog called “Blogtown, PDX” where the newspaper’s reporters post articles and members of the public may post comments.

On January 31, 2008, Mercury reporter Amy Ruiz posted an article about activities at City Hall concerning mayoral candidate Sho Dozano. Various readers posted comments in response to the article, including a poster with the screenname “Ronald.” Terry Beard, who was derogatorily referenced in “Ronald”’s blog comment, filed suit against “Ronald” and those who had posted comments about Beard on other blogs. Beard also served a third-party subpoena on The Mercury, seeking information he could use to identify “Ronald.”

The Mercury objected to the subpoena, invoking Oregon’s “reporters’ shield law” to argued that a newspaper may not be compelled to identify the source of information or produce any “unpublished information” the newspaper has obtained in the course of “receiving” or “processing” information for a “medium of communication.” Based on this argument, the Clackamas County Circuit Court denied a motion to compel disclosure of the information.

Links and Court Documents:
http://www.oregonlive.com/news/index.ssf/2008/12/anonymous_blog_commenters_shie.html
http://blogtown.portlandmercury.com/archives/2008/10/01/the_portland_mercury_we_ll_go
http://www.portlandmercury.com/portland/blog-this/Content?oid=979329
http://www.tsweekly.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=3682&Itemid=71

Webster v. Albero, No. 0203-0003308-2007 (Md. Dist. Ct., Wicomico County transferred out Aug. 9, 2007) (transferred to Worcester County and renumbered); Webster v. Albero, No. 0204-0001876-2007 (Md. Dist. Ct., Worcester County (settled July 28, 2008).
Status: Settled (no monetary payment).

Salisbury, Md. police chief Allan Webster filed suit against Joe Albero over statements in his Salisbury News blog (sbynews.com). In August, the case was transferred to Worcester County court; in September, Albero invoked Maryland’s reporter’s shield law in order to protect the sources for his information. On April 10, 2008 the court denied Albero’s claim that he was protected by Maryland’s reporters privilege law, and scheduled trial for July 30, 2008. Two days before trial, the parties settled; according to Albero’s blog, there was no monetary payment.

Links and Court Documents:
http://www.sbynews.com/index.php/site/comments/the_chief_of_the_salisbury_police_department_is_suing_me_rotflmao/
http://www.delmarvanow.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20070703/NEWS01/707030336/1002
http://www.delmarvanow.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20070819/NEWS01/708190323
http://wjz.com/local/local_story_184065540.html
http://www.delmarvanow.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20070710/NEWS01/707100332/1002
http://www.delmarvanow.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20070903/NEWS01/709030301/1002
http://www.delmarvanow.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20071030/NEWS01/710300324
http://www.delmarvanow.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=2008804100418
http://sbynews.blogspot.com/2008/07/breaking-news-webster-v-albero.html
http://www.delmarvanow.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20080731/NEWS01/807310391/1002
http://www.mddailyrecord.com/article.cfm?id=6132&type=UTTM