Woman Sues Google Over Dead Blogger's Allegedly Defamatory Comments

from the have-fun-with-this-one dept

We've seen all sorts of arguments by folks who felt defamed to get around Section 230 safe harbors that say a service provider isn't liable for the content created by a user -- but this is a first: a woman is suing Google, claiming that the safe harbors don't apply, because the allegedly defamatory content comes from a blogger who is now deceased, and thus she cannot go after him to get him to remove the content. Thus, she claims, her only choice is to sue Google. As Eric Goldman points out in the link above, it's not clear this is true at all. The guy's assets clearly passed on to someone -- so someone must own the rights to the blogpost, whether they know it or not. It's difficult to see how a court would find Google liable, no matter what. However, as Goldman also notes, it would seem that there would be many more effective ways to have this content disappear if it was really an issue.

45 Comments | Leave a Comment..

Detailed Investigative Report On College Sports Recruiting Violations Dismissed As 'Blog' Story

from the sorta-missing-the-point... dept

We've been pointing out that just because journalism is moving away from print newspapers, it doesn't take away from investigative journalism, at all. In fact, we've seen how there are a number of new online investigative journalism operations that are moving in to pick up the slack. In fact, in the sports realm, it's been pointed out before that the best sports journalists are getting snapped up left and right (for much higher salaries) by the various online entities, and they're still doing tremendous investigative reporting work. Just last week, Dan Wetzel and Adrian Wojnarowski, both well-respected sports writers with pretty long resumes in the field, broke a story about how UConn had violated recruiting rules.

It had everything that a typical investigative report should include. It involved a six-month investigation, and the amount of background and detail is quite impressive. It's exactly what an investigative report should be, even if it was published only online and there were no subscribers who had to "pay" to make it happen. It seems to pretty clearly disprove the idea that the only way to fund investigative journalism is to have it paid for by subscribers. That's never actually been true in the past, but it's even clearer with this story.

Still, perhaps the most ridiculous part of the story, as pointed out by one of our readers, Dave, is that the basketball coach who was implicated for recruiting violations in the story, Jim Calhoun, decided that, rather than respond to the allegations, he could dismiss them entirely because they appeared online only:

It was a newspaper story that ... it wasn't a newspaper, I'm sorry. It was a blog story that appeared, I guess, in something I probably can't get a hold of, which is Yahoo! And very simply my comments are what I said.

So, this guy thinks that since the publishing of an in-depth investigative report happened in an online only source (a) it's obviously "a blog story" (even though it wasn't) and (b) it can be waved off. Of course, now that the story isn't just appearing on "a blog" -- it's appearing in the NY Times and the NY Daily News and the Boston Globe, among many other print newspapers -- maybe he'll admit that perhaps it's an issue?

Investigative reporting is investigative reporting, whether it happens online or in a newspaper. Journalists (and investigation subjects) who ignore that do so at their own peril.

18 Comments | Leave a Comment..

Should You Live Blog/Twitter A College Class?

from the questions-of-a-new-age dept

It's quite common these days for people to "live blog" or "live Twitter" different conferences or events they're attending, filling in others what's happening in near real time. However, what happens when someone does that in a college class? Already, there are some professors struggling with the fact that students use the internet during class, but they're not at all happy about the idea that they might not just be using the internet to surf around -- but to report to others what's happening inside the classroom. The issue is discussed in detail by Mark Glaser in his latest MediaShift column after an NYU professor told her students to stop blogging or Twittering things about her class.

The controversy apparently began when a student in the class actually wrote a guest "embedded" column for MediaShift a few weeks ago, complaining that NYU's journalism school wasn't up-to-date on teaching students about social media and the new tools of journalism. The professor in the class she talked about wasn't particularly happy about the article, which was then discussed in the class itself (very meta). According to students in the class (and the author of the original piece), the professor made it clear that they were no longer to blog, text or Twitter about the class, or to quote the professor without permission. Considering the class itself is called “Reporting Gen Y," that seemed like an odd restriction.

The professor differs on what she told the students, saying that she only meant they couldn't blog or Twitter during the class, but were free to afterwards. However, she stood by the comment that she shouldn't be quoted without permission. Glaser investigates the legality of this, and how it fits with NYU's journalism standards. That said, it is a little odd that it's perfectly fine to quote or blog about conferences or other events, but once you're in the classroom, a cloak of silence is expected. To some extent, this sounds like it may just be a generational issue. Perhaps it's the actual Gen Y'ers who should be teaching the class on Reporting Gen Y.

36 Comments | Leave a Comment..

Copyright Expert William Patry Shuts Down Blog, As It's 'Too Depressing'

from the sad-day dept

It was really disappointing, if entirely understandable, earlier this year when the until-then-anonymous "Patent Troll Tracker" had to shut down his blog. Prior to that, it had been one of the only sources (and in some cases the only source) to report on some important cases and trends in the patent world. Unfortunately, it appears the same thing is now happening in the copyright world. William Patry, recognized around the world as an expert on copyright, has shut down his blog. Tragically, he didn't just stop writing it, he's deleted the entire archive -- so even posts of his that we pointed to just last week no longer are live. This is really unfortunate -- and there seems to be no reason he couldn't have allowed the archives to live on.

As for the reasons for shutting it down, his first is that he was sick of people taking the word on his personal blog as the position of Google, since he works there. When he started the blog, he did not work there, and since he joined the company he was quite explicit about that fact and never commented on cases or stories that involved Google or even other cases involving companies involved in lawsuits against Google. However, too many people would take what he said as the "word of Google," unfortunately.

Much more importantly, however, he notes that writing about the state of copyright these days has become "too depressing." This should really open some eyes. Patry has always been a supporter of the copyright system. But he's become depressed with how the system has been changing, such that he finds himself constantly writing about changes or abuses of the system. Even (as he puts it) being a "centrist" on copyright issues, he's seen how far in one direction certain interests are trying to pull copyright, and it means he's constantly pulling hard in the other direction, making him seem less like a centrist and making him depressed for having to write so negatively about things happening in the copyright world.

Copyright law has abandoned its reason for being: to encourage learning and the creation of new works. Instead, its principal functions now are to preserve existing failed business models, to suppress new business models and technologies, and to obtain, if possible, enormous windfall profits from activity that not only causes no harm, but which is beneficial to copyright owners. Like Humpty-Dumpty, the copyright law we used to know can never be put back together again: multilateral and trade agreements have ensured that, and quite deliberately.

It is profoundly depressing, after 26 years full-time in a field I love, to be a constant voice of dissent. I have tried various ways to leaven this state of affairs with positive postings, much like television news shows that experiment with "happy features." I have blogged about great articles others have written, or highlighted scholars who have not gotten the attention they deserve; I tried to find cases, even inconsequential ones, that I can fawn over. But after awhile, this wore thin, because the most important stories are too often ones that involve initiatives that are, in my opinion, seriously harmful to the public interest. I cannot continue to be so negative, so often. Being so negative, while deserved on the merits, gives a distorted perspective of my centrist views, and is emotionally a downer.

This should be a huge downer for everyone else as well. While Patry and I disagreed about the extent of reform needed in copyright, he is one of the sharpest minds on any issue having to do with copyright, and having him silence himself means that the forces he was sick of fighting -- those who are constantly stretching and abusing copyright -- have just won yet another battle. That makes it that much harder for the rest of us to stop certain industries from continuing to stretch, twist and abuse copyright, not for good reasons, but merely to prop up their own obsolete business models. One hopes that others in the field will step up and help prove to Patry and others that this isn't too depressing -- and that this is a battle that can be won -- but no one will be able to fully replace his regular insightful opinions on the subject.

29 Comments | Leave a Comment..

Duke University Tries To Shut Down Lacrosse Players' Blog

from the apparently-streisand-doesn't-play-lacrosse dept

It would appear that officials at Duke aren't particularly familiar with The Streisand Effect. As you may have heard, a few years back there was a case that got a ton of media attention, with some Duke lacrosse players being accused of rape. Eventually, after fanning the flames in the media, prosecutors had to drop the case for lack of any actual evidence -- and the prosecutor who led the charge was disbarred. The lacrosse players are striking back, suing the University and the city of Durham. As the case moves forward, they've put up their own blog, at DukeLawsuit.com. However, the university and the city aren't too happy about it and have tried to get the court to force the blog offline -- which, of course, is only drawing a lot more attention to it.

14 Comments | Leave a Comment..

If You're A Wanted Fugitive In The US And You Blog, Maybe Don't Mention Plans To Travel To A US Territory

from the just-a-suggestion dept

The LA Times has a story about a Japanese man who has been wanted on charges of murder for over 25 years, who was finally arrested thanks to him tipping off authorities on his blog that he would be traveling to the US territory of Saipan. Kazuyoshi Miura is believed by US authorities to have killed his wife, while the pair were visiting the US in 1981. He was tried and convicted in Japan -- but the case was overturned. US authorities have been trying to arrest him ever since. Apparently, a few years back he set up a blog, and US police have been monitoring it to see if he would do something so silly as to mention the fact that he'd be traveling to a US territory -- which he actually did. So, just as a public service announcement: if you're a wanted fugitive in the US, perhaps don't announce on your blog that you'll be traveling there.

32 Comments | Leave a Comment..