{"id":2082,"date":"2010-01-01T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2010-01-01T00:00:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/medialaw.org\/medialawletter-february-2010\/"},"modified":"2020-10-12T21:37:52","modified_gmt":"2020-10-12T21:37:52","slug":"medialawletter-february-2010","status":"publish","type":"post_issue","link":"https:\/\/medialaw.org\/issue\/medialawletter-february-2010\/","title":{"rendered":"MediaLawLetter February 2010"},"content":{"rendered":"

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

LIBEL & PRIVACY<\/h3>\n

Cal. App.: Rolling Stone Editorial Content Receives Broad First Amendment Protection<\/a>
Not Commercial Speech Because of Gatefold Advertisement Context<\/em>
Stewart v. Rolling Stone; Keller v. Electronic Arts<\/p>\n

N.Y.\/Ind.: Right of Publicity Grabs Legislative Attention<\/a>
New York Bill Would Protect Rights of Deceased Celebrities<\/em>
S.6790; HB.1335; S.2775<\/p>\n

Mass.: Reporter Not Protected by Massachusetts Anti-SLAPP Law<\/a>
Quick Dismissal and Attorneys Fees Unavailable<\/em>
Fustolo v. Hollander<\/p>\n

10th Cir.: Tenth Circuit Affirms Dismissal of Suit Against John Grisham, Random House and Other Authors and Publishers<\/a>
Plaintiffs Failed to State Claim for Libel and Related Claims<\/em>
Peterson v. Grisham, et al.<\/p>\n

D.C.. Cir.: D.C. Circuit Reinstates Libel Complaint Against NGO<\/a>
Rejects Human Rights Group\u2019s Fair Report Defense<\/em>
Jankovic v. International Crisis Group<\/p>\n

3rd Cir.: Affirms Dismissal of Privacy Claims Involving Google\u2019s Street View Service, but Reinstates Trespass Claim<\/a>
Failure to Plead Nominal Damages Not Fatal to Claim<\/em>
Boring v. Google<\/p>\n

Ill. App.: Court Affirms Fair Report Privilege for Newspaper In Holiday Misidentification Mishap<\/a>
No Obligation to Review Updated Material<\/em>
Eubanks v. Northwest Herald Newspapers<\/p>\n

N.J. App.: Ex-Con Loses Libel Case Against Book Author and Publisher<\/a>
Plaintiff a Public Figure for Discussion of His Criminal Past<\/em>
Berkery v. Estate of Lyle Stuart et al.<\/p>\n

N.D. Ill.: Perils of Reality TV \u2013 Court Refuses to Dismiss Section 1983 Claim<\/a>
Media Could Be \u201cState Actor\u201d For Complaint Over Coverage of Arrest<\/em>
Frederick v. The Biography Channel, et al.<\/p>\n

Ill. Cir. Ct.: \u201cTweet\u201d About Moldy Apartment Held Non-actionable in Illinois Libel Case<\/a>
Plaintiff Claimed Tweet Was Defamatory Per Se<\/em>
Horizon Group Management, LLC v. Bonnen<\/p>\n

Ariz.; Utah: Libel Tourism Bills Introduced in Arizona and Utah<\/a>
Bills Appear Headed for Passage<\/em>
Ariz. SB 1268; Utah HB 96<\/p>\n

N.J. App.; Ore. App.: Defamation Lawsuits and the Religion Clauses<\/a>
Limitations on Libel Suits Involving Matters of Religion<\/em>
Abdelhak v. The Jewish Press; Tubra v. Cooke<\/p>\n

REPORTERS PRIVILEGE<\/h3>\n

E.D. Mich.: Judge Upholds Reporter\u2019s Source Protection Under 5th Amendment<\/a>
Plaintiff Pursuing Privacy Act Case<\/em>
Convertino v United States Department of Justice<\/p>\n

ACCESS<\/h3>\n

S.D.N.Y.: Public Right of Access \u201cUnmoored\u201d in the Southern District of New York<\/a>
First Amendment Right of Access to Administrative Proceeding<\/em>
New York Civil Liberties Union v. New York City Transit Authority<\/p>\n

10th Cir.: Court Remands Issue of First Impression Concerning Bar Organization\u2019s Right to Interview Jurors<\/a>
Bar Group Wants to Interview Jurors for Educational Purpose<\/em>
Clyma v. Sunoco Inc.<\/p>\n

INTERNATIONAL<\/h3>\n

France: Court Rules in Favor of Roman Polanski on Photo Privacy Complaints<\/a>
Some Photos of Family and in Car Not of Legitimate Public Interest<\/em><\/p>\n

Canada: Supreme Court of Canada Decision in Quan v. Cusson<\/a>
Media Entitled to Rely on the Responsible Communication Defense<\/em>
Quan v. Cusson<\/p>\n

ETHICS<\/h3>\n

Technology-Based Ethical Challenges<\/a>
Practical Advice for Dealing With The Disclosure of Metadata<\/em><\/p>\n","protected":false},"featured_media":79,"template":"","issues-publication":[1002],"acf":[],"yoast_head":"\nMediaLawLetter February 2010 - 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-february-2010\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"MediaLawLetter February 2010 - Media Law Resource Center\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:description\" content=\" Download Publication LIBEL & PRIVACY Cal. App.: Rolling Stone Editorial Content Receives Broad First Amendment ProtectionNot Commercial Speech Because of Gatefold Advertisement ContextStewart v. Rolling Stone; Keller v. Electronic Arts N.Y.\/Ind.: Right of Publicity Grabs Legislative AttentionNew York Bill Would Protect Rights of Deceased CelebritiesS.6790; HB.1335; S.2775 Mass.: Reporter Not Protected by Massachusetts Anti-SLAPP LawQuick...\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/medialaw.org\/issue\/medialawletter-february-2010\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:site_name\" content=\"Media Law Resource Center\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2020-10-12T21:37:52+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-february-2010\/\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/medialaw.org\/issue\/medialawletter-february-2010\/\",\"name\":\"MediaLawLetter February 2010 - Media Law Resource Center\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/medialaw.org\/#website\"},\"primaryImageOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/medialaw.org\/issue\/medialawletter-february-2010\/#primaryimage\"},\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/medialaw.org\/issue\/medialawletter-february-2010\/#primaryimage\"},\"thumbnailUrl\":\"https:\/\/medialaw.org\/wp-content\/uploads\/2011\/03\/pdf_small.gif\",\"datePublished\":\"2010-01-01T00:00:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2020-10-12T21:37:52+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/medialaw.org\/issue\/medialawletter-february-2010\/#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\/\/medialaw.org\/issue\/medialawletter-february-2010\/\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/medialaw.org\/issue\/medialawletter-february-2010\/#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-february-2010\/#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 February 2010\"}]},{\"@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 February 2010 - 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-february-2010\/","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"MediaLawLetter February 2010 - Media Law Resource Center","og_description":" Download Publication LIBEL & PRIVACY Cal. App.: Rolling Stone Editorial Content Receives Broad First Amendment ProtectionNot Commercial Speech Because of Gatefold Advertisement ContextStewart v. Rolling Stone; Keller v. Electronic Arts N.Y.\/Ind.: Right of Publicity Grabs Legislative AttentionNew York Bill Would Protect Rights of Deceased CelebritiesS.6790; HB.1335; S.2775 Mass.: Reporter Not Protected by Massachusetts Anti-SLAPP LawQuick...","og_url":"https:\/\/medialaw.org\/issue\/medialawletter-february-2010\/","og_site_name":"Media Law Resource Center","article_modified_time":"2020-10-12T21:37:52+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-february-2010\/","url":"https:\/\/medialaw.org\/issue\/medialawletter-february-2010\/","name":"MediaLawLetter February 2010 - Media Law Resource Center","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/medialaw.org\/#website"},"primaryImageOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/medialaw.org\/issue\/medialawletter-february-2010\/#primaryimage"},"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/medialaw.org\/issue\/medialawletter-february-2010\/#primaryimage"},"thumbnailUrl":"https:\/\/medialaw.org\/wp-content\/uploads\/2011\/03\/pdf_small.gif","datePublished":"2010-01-01T00:00:00+00:00","dateModified":"2020-10-12T21:37:52+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/medialaw.org\/issue\/medialawletter-february-2010\/#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/medialaw.org\/issue\/medialawletter-february-2010\/"]}]},{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/medialaw.org\/issue\/medialawletter-february-2010\/#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-february-2010\/#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 February 2010"}]},{"@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\/2082"}],"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=2082"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"issues-publication","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/medialaw.org\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/issues-publication?post=2082"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}