London Conference a Resounding Success with Engaging Panels, Fun Receptions
My last column waxed rhapsodic about anticipating the joys of London – not only our Conference, but the energy, activities, history, culture and architecture of the city itself. I am pleased to report that after five days there for our biennial London Conference, I didn’t oversell it one bit. Our attendees felt the Conference was very worthwhile, with engaging topics and excellent speakers, and they enjoyed the sights and activities of the city as well.
As is our tradition, within five hours of landing at Heathrow, MLRC deputy director Dave Heller and a small group of MLRC stalwarts and I attended a Premier League soccer (that is, football) match, played at a stadium built in 1895 on the banks of the Thames. It was an intense and exciting game, ultimately won by the home team and underdog, Fulham, in the final minutes. After dinner, we went to a British comedy in the West End, but, frankly, given a lack of sleep on the trans-Atlantic redeye, though hardly sophisticated, some of it passed me by.
Sunday was a day full of pre-Conference receptions. First, Mark Stephens and his firm, Howard Kennedy, hosted a champagne brunch in their offices just above London Bridge (it hasn’t yet fallen) and in view of the Tower Bridge, a few hundred yards down the Thames. After that, we took a ferry down the river to a boat docked near the Embankment for a reception hosted by Jackson Walker. It featured a very interesting discussion moderated by JW’s Bob Latham about the globalization of the NFL, with the whys and hows the NFL is expanding to places like London and Germany. Since notice of the JW event and/or word of mouth did not reach every delegate to the conference, JW has requested that the MLRC include its event in two years in the conference program, which we will do. Early evening brought us to the sleek Bloomberg headquarters where Randy Shapiro hosted a fun party featuring a cocktail concoction of unspecified nature.
Monday, with fun and games behind us, the Conference started in earnest. Our first panel focused on hot issues in journalism, primarily misinformation, and also, to a lesser degree, privacy rights of celebrities. Disinformation is a very complex and difficult subject to get one’s hands around in a panel situation, but Pia Sarma did a superb job of taking our two star journalists through it in an organized and thoughtful way. This excellent program was followed by another timely and engaging panel on anti-Slapp legislation in the UK and EU nations. Featured on this panel was Christopher Steele, he of the Steele Dossier fame. He did not talk about what Trump was a doing in Russian hotels, but rather spoke about being a SLAPP victim, sued some eight times about his Dossier, even though he said he neither consented to publication nor was involved in its distribution.
After lunch I interviewed Jennifer Robinson, who has represented Julian Assange for over a decade and was integrally involved in the negotiations which led to the plea agreement freeing Assange from jail. Her account gave credit to the Australian Government for driving the negotiation. While Jen conceded that the agreement was not great for investigative journalism into national security as a whole, it was far better than a troublesome legal precedent on the Espionage Act which might well have been the result if Assange, or the DOJ, had somehow forced a legal showdown. Jen also talked about her book, “Silenced Women,” in the #MeToo context and how the law fails to help women victims fight back.
We then had a session on vetting a hypothetical article, with analyses from US, UK and EU points of view. It engendered a lot of participation, with attendees giving varying answers not dependent on the jurisdiction they were from. For better or worse, the exercise seemed to show that pre-pub review is not a science, and that there are no right or wrong answers.
The final program of the day was a somewhat light-hearted and entertaining look at the legal issues spawned by media coverage of the Royals and the many litigations commenced by Harry and Meghan. Moderated by Adam Cannon and Adelaide Lopez, many of the examples were of the royal families out in public – on the beach or on the ski slopes – yet claiming the publication of photos of them there invaded their right of privacy. Whatever the differences between the countries in libel law, this was a place where American law is starkly different and more protective of the press than European law.
The evening event was a reception hosted by Hiscox, and also sponsored by Wiggin, at The Old Bailey, London’s vaunted and venerable criminal courthouse and prison. But as down and dirty as that sounds, the reception was in a regal-looking hall, more elegant and beautiful than any criminal building I’ve ever seen. A highlight of the evening was a talk given by a meticulous English court administrator in Courtroom #1 about the history and procedures of criminal trials in that courtroom going back generations. A great ending to a long day.
Tuesday, day two of the Conference, began with a very moving discussion of persecutions and prosecutions of journalists around the world. Mark Stephens moderated the session featuring human rights lawyers Baroness Helena Kennedy and Caoilfhionn Gallagher. Their description of the plight of beleaguered journalists in the many countries of the world where the rule of law is hardly followed was a harsh reminder that some of our legal problems pale in comparison to the wicked craziness which goes on elsewhere.
We were brought back to earth by the next panel, a look at comparative IP law in jurisdictions ranging from Australia to the Netherlands. One highlight of that session was Simone Procas’ talk on the NY Times lawsuit against Microsoft / OpenAI alleging chatbots were trained on its material.
At the end of the lunch break, David McCraw presented on the recent Second Circuit opinion reversing both the judge’s and the jury’s decisions in favor of The New York Times in the libel case brought by Sarah Palin. While unhappy with it, David explained the bases for the appellate panel’s holding in a presentation appreciated by Americans and non-Americans alike. (I should note that attendance at the Conference was split: about 50% from the US and the remaining 50% from the UK, Australia and other countries around the globe.)
The afternoon began with something new for the Conference – three smaller “breakout” sessions. We have found that our members really appreciate breakouts – a change of pace which gives all attendees a chance to participate and get involved in interactive conversation. We offered registrants a chance to participate in one of three breakouts: a session on International Law 101, geared in part to more junior lawyers; Media Deals, going through documents and deal points of a cross-border documentary; and a session on regulation of online content in the EU, UK and Australia.
Finally, our last program was a double session around AI. The first half was a demonstration of an AI tool which does prepublication vetting, but would not, we were reminded, take away that function from actual lawyers.
In the second half, we had our traditional Oxbridge-style debate on the question: will AI be fundamentally good or bad, with a focus on lawyers. British barrister Fraser Campbell impeccably argued the negative. But Minnesota lawyer Leita Walker, with impassioned flare, argued the positive, making both eloquent points and an equal number of riffs humorously knocking British mores and culture. Judge Dave Heller took an audience vote and quickly declared the debate a draw, ending the Conference on a just note.
Wednesday, as has been our tradition, was a morning meeting of in-house counsel, held at the offices of The Financial Times. The meeting always serves as a great vehicle for in-housers to discuss common issues, and this year’s gathering was no exception. It marked the end of a full and fulfilling five days. I headed back to Heathrow and home, while other members were more creative, traveling to Iceland, Scotland, Holland and other points east. Thanks again to our sponsors, speakers and attendees who all contributed to making the Conference such a success.
George Freeman is executive director of MLRC. All opinions expressed are his alone and not those of the organization. Feedback is welcome; email gfreeman@medialaw.org.