{"id":1892,"date":"2011-08-20T18:07:56","date_gmt":"2011-08-20T18:07:56","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/medialaw.org\/medialawletter-july-2011\/"},"modified":"2020-08-20T19:03:38","modified_gmt":"2020-08-20T19:03:38","slug":"medialawletter-july-2011","status":"publish","type":"post_issue","link":"https:\/\/medialaw.org\/issue\/medialawletter-july-2011\/","title":{"rendered":"MediaLawLetter July 2011"},"content":{"rendered":"

\"pdf\" <\/a><\/strong>Download Publication<\/a><\/p>\n

“HOT NEWS” MISAPPROPRIATION<\/h3>\n

2d Cir.: Second Circuit Reverses “Hot News” Judgment and Injunction<\/a>
But Media “Hot News” Claims Remain Viable<\/em>
Barclays Capital, Inc. v. Theflyonthewall<\/p>\n

REPORTERS PRIVILEGE<\/h3>\n

N.J.: High Court Addresses Shield Law Protection for “New Media” Journalists<\/a>
Privilege Claims By “New Media” Journalists Require Scrutiny<\/em>
Too Much Media V. Hale<\/p>\n

N.Y. Sup.: Court Quashes Subpoena For Reality Show Outtakes<\/a>
Criminal Defendant Failed to Meet Test to Pierce Shield Law<\/em>
Hodson v. Al Roker Entertainment<\/p>\n

LIBEL & PRIVACY<\/h3>\n

N.D. Ga.: Court Reduces Jury’s Punitive Damages Award in Right of Publicity Case<\/a>
$19.6 Million Award Against Hustler Magazine Reduced to $250,000<\/em>
Toffoloni v. LFP Publishing, LLC<\/p>\n

11th Cir.: Court Upholds Dismissal of Privacy Claims Over “Cops” Episode<\/a>
Plaintiff Failed to Allege Facts to Support Privacy Claims<\/em>
Spilfogel v. Fox Broadcasting<\/p>\n

N.D. Fla.: Florida Federal Court Enters Judgment Declaring Canadian Defamation Judgment Unenforceable  in United States<\/a>
Canadian Judgment Unenforceable Pursuant to SPEECH Act and Florida Libel Tourism Provisions<\/em>
Investorshub.com v. Mina Mar Group, Inc.<\/p>\n

S.D. Ind.: Publicity and Trademark Claims Against Video Game Maker Dismissed<\/a>
Indiana Right of Publicity Statute Not Retroactive; First Amendment Bars Trademark Claim<\/em>
Dillinger, LLC v. Electronic Arts, Inc.<\/p>\n

C.D. Cal.: Corbis Wins Right of Publicity Suit Over Thumbnails<\/a>
Plaintiff Posed for Pictures Knowing They Would Be Distributed<\/em>
Jones v. Corbis Corporation<\/p>\n

LEGISLATIVE UPDATES<\/h3>\n

Texas: Passage of the Texas Anti-SLAPP Statute<\/a>
A Walk in the Park or a Walk on a Tightrope?<\/em>
Texas Citizen Participation Act<\/p>\n

Congress: PROTECT IP Act Waiting Senate Action<\/a>
Congress Considering Online Piracy Legislation<\/p>\n

INTERNATIONAL<\/h3>\n

Australia: State Enacts New Journalist Privilege Law<\/a>
New South Wales First State in Australia to Enact \u201cJournalist Privilege\u201d<\/em><\/p>\n

ACCESS<\/h3>\n

Wash.: University of Washington Pays $175,000 to Settle Public Records Litigation<\/a>
University Ordered to Release Data From 2007 Baby Video Research Study <\/em>
Clark v. University of Washington<\/p>\n

Texas: Supreme Court Recognizes Common Law Physical Safety Exception to Public Information Act<\/a>
Interest in Personal Safety Outweighs Statutory Right to Public Information
Texas Department of Public Safety v. Cox Texas Newspapers<\/p>\n

COMMERCIAL SPEECH<\/h3>\n

W.D. Wash.: Court Upholds Ordinance Regulating Distribution of Yellow Pages<\/a>
Dex Media West, Inc. v. City of Seattle<\/em><\/p>\n","protected":false},"featured_media":79,"template":"","issues-publication":[1002],"acf":[],"yoast_head":"\nMediaLawLetter July 2011 - Media Law Resource Center<\/title>\n<meta name=\"robots\" content=\"index, follow, max-snippet:-1, max-image-preview:large, max-video-preview:-1\" \/>\n<link rel=\"canonical\" href=\"https:\/\/medialaw.org\/issue\/medialawletter-july-2011\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"MediaLawLetter July 2011 - Media Law Resource Center\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:description\" content=\" Download Publication “HOT NEWS” MISAPPROPRIATION 2d Cir.: Second Circuit Reverses “Hot News” Judgment and InjunctionBut Media “Hot News” Claims Remain Viable Barclays Capital, Inc. v. Theflyonthewall REPORTERS PRIVILEGE N.J.: High Court Addresses Shield Law Protection for “New Media” Journalists Privilege Claims By “New Media” Journalists Require Scrutiny Too Much Media V. Hale N.Y. Sup.: Court...\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/medialaw.org\/issue\/medialawletter-july-2011\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:site_name\" content=\"Media Law Resource Center\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2020-08-20T19:03:38+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:image\" content=\"https:\/\/medialaw.org\/wp-content\/uploads\/2011\/03\/pdf_small.gif\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:width\" content=\"16\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:height\" content=\"16\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:type\" content=\"image\/gif\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:card\" content=\"summary_large_image\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:label1\" content=\"Est. reading time\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data1\" content=\"2 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\/\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/medialaw.org\/issue\/medialawletter-july-2011\/\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/medialaw.org\/issue\/medialawletter-july-2011\/\",\"name\":\"MediaLawLetter July 2011 - Media Law Resource Center\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/medialaw.org\/#website\"},\"primaryImageOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/medialaw.org\/issue\/medialawletter-july-2011\/#primaryimage\"},\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/medialaw.org\/issue\/medialawletter-july-2011\/#primaryimage\"},\"thumbnailUrl\":\"https:\/\/medialaw.org\/wp-content\/uploads\/2011\/03\/pdf_small.gif\",\"datePublished\":\"2011-08-20T18:07:56+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2020-08-20T19:03:38+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/medialaw.org\/issue\/medialawletter-july-2011\/#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\/\/medialaw.org\/issue\/medialawletter-july-2011\/\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/medialaw.org\/issue\/medialawletter-july-2011\/#primaryimage\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/medialaw.org\/wp-content\/uploads\/2011\/03\/pdf_small.gif\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\/\/medialaw.org\/wp-content\/uploads\/2011\/03\/pdf_small.gif\",\"width\":16,\"height\":16,\"caption\":\"pdf\"},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/medialaw.org\/issue\/medialawletter-july-2011\/#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\/\/medialaw.org\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"MediaLawLetter\",\"item\":\"https:\/\/medialaw.org\/issues\/publication\/medialawletter\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":3,\"name\":\"MediaLawLetter July 2011\"}]},{\"@type\":\"WebSite\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/medialaw.org\/#website\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/medialaw.org\/\",\"name\":\"Media Law Resource Center\",\"description\":\"\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"SearchAction\",\"target\":{\"@type\":\"EntryPoint\",\"urlTemplate\":\"https:\/\/medialaw.org\/?s={search_term_string}\"},\"query-input\":\"required name=search_term_string\"}],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\"}]}<\/script>\n<!-- \/ Yoast SEO plugin. -->","yoast_head_json":{"title":"MediaLawLetter July 2011 - Media Law Resource Center","robots":{"index":"index","follow":"follow","max-snippet":"max-snippet:-1","max-image-preview":"max-image-preview:large","max-video-preview":"max-video-preview:-1"},"canonical":"https:\/\/medialaw.org\/issue\/medialawletter-july-2011\/","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"MediaLawLetter July 2011 - Media Law Resource Center","og_description":" Download Publication “HOT NEWS” MISAPPROPRIATION 2d Cir.: Second Circuit Reverses “Hot News” Judgment and InjunctionBut Media “Hot News” Claims Remain Viable Barclays Capital, Inc. v. Theflyonthewall REPORTERS PRIVILEGE N.J.: High Court Addresses Shield Law Protection for “New Media” Journalists Privilege Claims By “New Media” Journalists Require Scrutiny Too Much Media V. Hale N.Y. Sup.: Court...","og_url":"https:\/\/medialaw.org\/issue\/medialawletter-july-2011\/","og_site_name":"Media Law Resource Center","article_modified_time":"2020-08-20T19:03:38+00:00","og_image":[{"width":16,"height":16,"url":"https:\/\/medialaw.org\/wp-content\/uploads\/2011\/03\/pdf_small.gif","type":"image\/gif"}],"twitter_card":"summary_large_image","twitter_misc":{"Est. reading time":"2 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/medialaw.org\/issue\/medialawletter-july-2011\/","url":"https:\/\/medialaw.org\/issue\/medialawletter-july-2011\/","name":"MediaLawLetter July 2011 - Media Law Resource Center","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/medialaw.org\/#website"},"primaryImageOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/medialaw.org\/issue\/medialawletter-july-2011\/#primaryimage"},"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/medialaw.org\/issue\/medialawletter-july-2011\/#primaryimage"},"thumbnailUrl":"https:\/\/medialaw.org\/wp-content\/uploads\/2011\/03\/pdf_small.gif","datePublished":"2011-08-20T18:07:56+00:00","dateModified":"2020-08-20T19:03:38+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/medialaw.org\/issue\/medialawletter-july-2011\/#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/medialaw.org\/issue\/medialawletter-july-2011\/"]}]},{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/medialaw.org\/issue\/medialawletter-july-2011\/#primaryimage","url":"https:\/\/medialaw.org\/wp-content\/uploads\/2011\/03\/pdf_small.gif","contentUrl":"https:\/\/medialaw.org\/wp-content\/uploads\/2011\/03\/pdf_small.gif","width":16,"height":16,"caption":"pdf"},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/medialaw.org\/issue\/medialawletter-july-2011\/#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/medialaw.org\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"MediaLawLetter","item":"https:\/\/medialaw.org\/issues\/publication\/medialawletter\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":3,"name":"MediaLawLetter July 2011"}]},{"@type":"WebSite","@id":"https:\/\/medialaw.org\/#website","url":"https:\/\/medialaw.org\/","name":"Media Law Resource Center","description":"","potentialAction":[{"@type":"SearchAction","target":{"@type":"EntryPoint","urlTemplate":"https:\/\/medialaw.org\/?s={search_term_string}"},"query-input":"required name=search_term_string"}],"inLanguage":"en-US"}]}},"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/medialaw.org\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/post_issue\/1892"}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/medialaw.org\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/post_issue"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/medialaw.org\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post_issue"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/medialaw.org\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/79"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/medialaw.org\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=1892"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"issues-publication","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/medialaw.org\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/issues-publication?post=1892"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}