A federal judge in Oregon has ruled that bloggers who aren’t affiliated with what the government recognizes as a mainstream “news outlet” don’t have the same rights to freedom of the press enshrined in the First Amendment as members of the mainstream media.
The ruling was related to a lawsuit against a blogger in Montana who posted information critical of an Oregon attorney handling a bankruptcy case. A state shield law is also in place which would have protected officially approved journalists from being sued for a similar article.
And so it begins. Private lawfare in action. Next thing you know, lawyer jokes are going to get you declared an enemy combatant.
I wonder how the Judges will feel when they find out Julian Assange has been a member of an Australian Journalists Union (and now is a life member) and the winner of the Australian rquivelant to a Pulitzer (Walkley). Will they consider him a MSM Journalist? Or was this prosecution in fact the so called precedent to say Assange has no rights to shield laws?
Appeal the matter to a Higher Court!
This ruling is as dangerous as the Defense Authorization bill.
This is not a surprise. The Judge is only doing what is expected by the corporations. The fact that she could not prove the truth of the statement is minor over the fact that she would be bankrupt no matter if she won or lost.
I am presently living with an out of control homeowners association. I fully understand that 'out of control' and homeowners association is redundant. There is nothing a person can do with either the corporations or homeowners.
This is why they are working so hard to force the identity of the people on the internet.
I would love to find out exactly what the corporation did and successful get everyone informed on the matters. She might be bankrupt but the only hope for the rest of us is to bankrupt the corporation is she was telling the truth.
All animal are equal but some Animals are more equal than others…Animal farm.