{"id":2092,"date":"2010-01-01T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2010-01-01T00:00:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/medialaw.org\/medialawletter-july-2010\/"},"modified":"2020-10-12T21:37:51","modified_gmt":"2020-10-12T21:37:51","slug":"medialawletter-july-2010","status":"publish","type":"post_issue","link":"https:\/\/medialaw.org\/issue\/medialawletter-july-2010\/","title":{"rendered":"MediaLawLetter July 2010"},"content":{"rendered":"

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

FCC<\/h3>\n

2nd Cir.: Second Circuit Rules FCC\u2019s “Fleeting Expletives” Indecency Enforcement Policy Unconstitutional<\/strong><\/a>
Broadcast Indecency Issue Likely Headed Back to Supreme Court<\/em>
Fox Television Stations v. FCC<\/p>\n

COPYRIGHT<\/h3>\n

S.D.N.Y.: Federal District Court Rules That DMCA “Safe Harbor” Protects YouTube<\/strong><\/a>
General Awareness of Infringement Doesn\u2019t Deprive Service Provider of Defense<\/em>
Viacom v. YouTube<\/p>\n

S.D.N.Y.: Viacom v. Google: District Court Grants Summary Judgment to Google<\/strong><\/a>
A Deeply Troubling Decision<\/em><\/p>\n

C.D. Cal.: Use of 7-Second Historic TV Clip in Broadway Show Deemed “Fair Use”<\/strong><\/a>
Judge Grants Jersey Boys\u2019 Motion for Summary Judgment in Copyright Action<\/em>
Sofa Entertainment Inc. v. Dodger Productions, Inc.<\/p>\n

SUPREME COURT<\/h3>\n

U.S.: Court Rejects Broad Constitutional Challenge to Washington\u2019s Public Records Act<\/strong><\/a>
Disclosure Of Ballot Signatures Not, as a General Matter, a First Amendment Violation<\/em>
Doe v. Reed<\/p>\n

U.S.: Court Rejects Challenge to Enron Conviction Predicated on Pretrial Media Coverage<\/strong><\/a>
Prominence Does Not Necessarily Produce Prejudice<\/em>
U.S. v. Skilling<\/p>\n

LIBEL & PRIVACY<\/h3>\n

Wash. App.: Court Rejects Defamation by Implication through Juxtaposition of True Statements<\/strong><\/a>
Declines to Expand State Law on Libel by Implication<\/em>
Yeakey v. Hearst Communications, Inc.<\/p>\n

D. Colo.: Summary Judgment Granted To The History Channel<\/strong><\/a>
Statement Concerning Federal Prisoner\u2019s Gang Affiliations Substantially True<\/em>
Bustos v. United States<\/p>\n

D.N.J.: Libel Complaint Against Local Newspaper Over Police Blotter Item Dismissed<\/strong><\/a>
Failure to Describe Charges as \u201cAlleged\u201d May Be Sloppy But Not False<\/em>
Ciemniecki v. Parker McCay, et al.<\/p>\n

9th Cir.: Less Protection for Anonymous Online Commercial Speech<\/strong><\/a>
Degree of Protection Varies Depending on Circumstances and Type Speech<\/em>
In re Anonymous Online Speakers<\/p>\n

Tex. App.: Court Upholds Preliminary Injunction in Online Libel Case<\/strong><\/a>
Alleged Defamatory Accusations Against Doctor Cause \u201cIrreparable Harm\u201d<\/em>
Townsend v. Liming<\/p>\n

10th Cir.: New Mexico Court Has Personal Jurisdiction Over a Florida Blogger<\/strong><\/a>
Blog Was Aimed Directly at State<\/em>
Silver v. Brown, McMullen, and Growth Technologies International<\/p>\n

INTERNATIONAL<\/h3>\n

UK: Reporting Criminal Investigations In The UK Just Got Riskier<\/strong><\/a>
Court of Appeals Rejects Reynolds Defense for Investigative Report<\/em>
Flood v. Times Newspapers Ltd.<\/p>\n

EJC: European Court of Justice Rules Data Protection Trumps EU Access Law<\/strong><\/a>
Names of Lobbyists and Officials Properly Withheld from Disclosure<\/em>
Commission v Bavarian Lager Co., Ltd.<\/p>\n

REPORTERS PRIVILEGE<\/h3>\n

Wisc.: State Enacts Reporters\u2019 Shield with Whistleblower Protection Act<\/strong><\/a>
39th State to Enact a Shield Law for Journalists<\/em>
“Whistleblower Protection Act” Wis. Stat. \u00a7 885.14<\/p>\n

2nd Cir.: Update: Court Orders Partial Disclosure of Documentary Outtakes<\/strong><\/a>
Court Limited Scope of Production; Full Opinion to Be Issued<\/em>
In re Chevron Corp.<\/p>\n

ACCESS<\/h3>\n

7th Cir.: Court Confirms Presumption Of Access To Juror Names During Trial<\/strong><\/a>
Judge Must Hold Hearing to Make \u201cConsidered Decision\u201d on Juror Anonymity<\/em>
United States v. Blagojevich<\/p>\n

S.D.N.Y.: Court Grants Access Motion Unsealing 9\/11 Property Damage Settlement Details<\/strong><\/a>
Common Law, First Amendment Rights Apply to Settlement Approval Filings<\/em>
World Trade Center Properties LLC v. United Airlines, et al.<\/p>\n

N.Y.: High Court Grants Newspaper Access to Police Gun Purchase Records<\/strong><\/a>
Records Not Exempt From Disclosure As Police \u201cPersonnel Records\u201d<\/em>
Capital Newspapers Div. of the Hearst Corp. v. City of Albany<\/p>\n

NEWSGATHERING<\/h3>\n

Cal. Sup. Ct.: Camerawomen Wins $1.732 Million Dollar Jury Award Against LAPD<\/strong><\/a>
Was Beaten By Police While Covering 2007 Immigration Rally<\/em>
Mecozzi vs. City of Los Angeles, et al.<\/p>\n

Photography Restrictions Run Rampant<\/strong><\/a>
Restrictions on Coverage of BP Disaster; Incidents Around the Country<\/em><\/p>\n

W.D. Wisc.: Wisconsin Court Upholds Exclusive Rights Contract<\/strong><\/a>
Rejects First Amendment Challenge to High School Athletics Internet Deal<\/em>
Wisconsin Interscholastic Athletic Ass\u2018n v. Gannett Co.<\/p>\n

NEWS & UPDATES<\/h3>\n

FTC Discussion Paper Outlines Potential Solutions to Save Journalism<\/strong><\/a>
\u201cHot News\u201d and Limitations on Fair Use on the Discussion Agenda<\/em><\/p>\n

ETHICS<\/h3>\n

Ethics Corner: Practical Advice for Documenting Conflict Waivers<\/strong><\/a>
How Does a Good Lawyer Effectively Document a Conflict Waiver?<\/em><\/p>\n","protected":false},"featured_media":79,"template":"","issues-publication":[1002],"acf":[],"yoast_head":"\nMediaLawLetter July 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-july-2010\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"MediaLawLetter July 2010 - Media Law Resource Center\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:description\" content=\" Download Publication FCC 2nd Cir.: Second Circuit Rules FCC\u2019s “Fleeting Expletives” Indecency Enforcement Policy UnconstitutionalBroadcast Indecency Issue Likely Headed Back to Supreme CourtFox Television Stations v. FCC COPYRIGHT S.D.N.Y.: Federal District Court Rules That DMCA “Safe Harbor” Protects YouTubeGeneral Awareness of Infringement Doesn\u2019t Deprive Service Provider of DefenseViacom v. YouTube S.D.N.Y.: Viacom v. Google: District...\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/medialaw.org\/issue\/medialawletter-july-2010\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:site_name\" content=\"Media Law Resource Center\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2020-10-12T21:37:51+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=\"3 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-2010\/\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/medialaw.org\/issue\/medialawletter-july-2010\/\",\"name\":\"MediaLawLetter July 2010 - Media Law Resource Center\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/medialaw.org\/#website\"},\"primaryImageOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/medialaw.org\/issue\/medialawletter-july-2010\/#primaryimage\"},\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/medialaw.org\/issue\/medialawletter-july-2010\/#primaryimage\"},\"thumbnailUrl\":\"https:\/\/medialaw.org\/wp-content\/uploads\/2011\/03\/pdf_small.gif\",\"datePublished\":\"2010-01-01T00:00:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2020-10-12T21:37:51+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/medialaw.org\/issue\/medialawletter-july-2010\/#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\/\/medialaw.org\/issue\/medialawletter-july-2010\/\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/medialaw.org\/issue\/medialawletter-july-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-july-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 July 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 July 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-july-2010\/","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"MediaLawLetter July 2010 - Media Law Resource Center","og_description":" Download Publication FCC 2nd Cir.: Second Circuit Rules FCC\u2019s “Fleeting Expletives” Indecency Enforcement Policy UnconstitutionalBroadcast Indecency Issue Likely Headed Back to Supreme CourtFox Television Stations v. FCC COPYRIGHT S.D.N.Y.: Federal District Court Rules That DMCA “Safe Harbor” Protects YouTubeGeneral Awareness of Infringement Doesn\u2019t Deprive Service Provider of DefenseViacom v. YouTube S.D.N.Y.: Viacom v. Google: District...","og_url":"https:\/\/medialaw.org\/issue\/medialawletter-july-2010\/","og_site_name":"Media Law Resource Center","article_modified_time":"2020-10-12T21:37:51+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":"3 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/medialaw.org\/issue\/medialawletter-july-2010\/","url":"https:\/\/medialaw.org\/issue\/medialawletter-july-2010\/","name":"MediaLawLetter July 2010 - Media Law Resource Center","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/medialaw.org\/#website"},"primaryImageOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/medialaw.org\/issue\/medialawletter-july-2010\/#primaryimage"},"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/medialaw.org\/issue\/medialawletter-july-2010\/#primaryimage"},"thumbnailUrl":"https:\/\/medialaw.org\/wp-content\/uploads\/2011\/03\/pdf_small.gif","datePublished":"2010-01-01T00:00:00+00:00","dateModified":"2020-10-12T21:37:51+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/medialaw.org\/issue\/medialawletter-july-2010\/#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/medialaw.org\/issue\/medialawletter-july-2010\/"]}]},{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/medialaw.org\/issue\/medialawletter-july-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-july-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 July 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\/2092"}],"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=2092"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"issues-publication","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/medialaw.org\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/issues-publication?post=2092"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}