Back in late 2011, there was much hand-wringing over a decision by a federal judge in Oregon that a blogger could not invoke the state's reporters' shield law in a libel case against her because, in that particular situation, the blogger was not acting as a journalist.
Showing posts with label Obsidian Finance Group v Cox+Shield Laws. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Obsidian Finance Group v Cox+Shield Laws. Show all posts
Jan 8, 2015
Oct 31, 2012
Amici Line Up In Appeal of "Blogger Not a Journalist" Ruling
(cross posted at the Citizen Media Law Project)
A federal judge's ruling that a blogger was not covered by Oregon's reporters' shield law is being appealed to the Ninth Circuit, and is getting some amicus support from media organizations. But the appeal -- and the amici -- are not addressing the main issue that led to an online uproar over the trial judge's initial decision.
A federal judge's ruling that a blogger was not covered by Oregon's reporters' shield law is being appealed to the Ninth Circuit, and is getting some amicus support from media organizations. But the appeal -- and the amici -- are not addressing the main issue that led to an online uproar over the trial judge's initial decision.
Labels:
Obsidian Finance Group v Cox
,
Shield Laws
,
Social Media
Apr 2, 2012
Judge Defends His Decision on Blogger
(cross posted at the Citizen Media Law Project)
Federal Judge Marco A. Hernandez got a lot of attention and cyberchatter late last year when he held that blogger Crystal Cox was not protected by Oregon's reporters' shield law, leading to a $2.5 million defamation verdict against her. See Obsidian Finance Group, LLC v. Cox, No. CV-11-57-H (D. Or. Nov. 30, 2011).
Federal Judge Marco A. Hernandez got a lot of attention and cyberchatter late last year when he held that blogger Crystal Cox was not protected by Oregon's reporters' shield law, leading to a $2.5 million defamation verdict against her. See Obsidian Finance Group, LLC v. Cox, No. CV-11-57-H (D. Or. Nov. 30, 2011).
Labels:
Obsidian Finance Group v Cox
,
Shield Laws
,
Social Media
Dec 7, 2011
No, the Sky is Not Failling: Explaining that Decision in Oregon
(cross posted at the Citizen Media Law Project)
For an update on this post, see http://bloglawonline.blogspot.com/2012/04/judge-defends-his-decision-on-blogger.html.
There's been a lot of buzz online (and now in the New York Times) about a decision by a federal judge in Oregon who released a decision last week holding that blogger Crystal Cox is was not protected by Oregon's reporters' shield law in a defamation suit against her, which led to a $2.5 million verdict against her. See Obsidian Finance Group, LLC v. Cox, No. CV-11-57-H (D. Or. Nov. 30, 2011). But most of the buzz and criticism is based on an erroneous reading of the decision.
For an update on this post, see http://bloglawonline.blogspot.com/2012/04/judge-defends-his-decision-on-blogger.html.
There's been a lot of buzz online (and now in the New York Times) about a decision by a federal judge in Oregon who released a decision last week holding that blogger Crystal Cox is was not protected by Oregon's reporters' shield law in a defamation suit against her, which led to a $2.5 million verdict against her. See Obsidian Finance Group, LLC v. Cox, No. CV-11-57-H (D. Or. Nov. 30, 2011). But most of the buzz and criticism is based on an erroneous reading of the decision.
Labels:
Obsidian Finance Group v Cox
,
Shield Laws
,
Social Media
Subscribe to:
Posts
(
Atom
)