Judge Decides That Fake Giraffe Attack Story Is Protected Free Speech

from the good-move dept

A few weeks back, we were a bit concerned about a judge's decision to force offline a satirical "news story" about a fake giraffe attack at the Global Wildlife Center in Louisiana. Just because GWC was worried that some people might take the story seriously, it doesn't remove the First Amendment rights of the creators of the satirical site. Thankfully, the judge now agrees and has removed the injunction and ordered GWC to pay the legal costs of the site's creators. The judge noted that while the center had some concerns about how the article was viewed, it doesn't change the fact that the content is protected free speech as satire.


Reader Comments (rss)

(Flattened / Threaded)

  1.  
    identicon
    Aaron, Mar 16th, 2010 @ 8:10pm

    The original

    The original article can be found here:
    http://www.hammondactionnews.com/post/411762027/giraffe0210

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  2.  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, Mar 16th, 2010 @ 8:59pm

    Re: The original

    There is a disclosure disclosing the fact that it's not real. Not sure if it was there before.

    If the disclosure wasn't there before then perhaps the judge shouldn't have demanded that legal fees be paid. The site actually looks like it was intended to be factual to a casual reader, especially someone who didn't know any better, and perhaps instead of an injunction the judge could have demanded that some sort of disclosure be posted somewhere indicating that this was satire? Maybe in this situation it's obviously satire but even so a disclosure wouldn't hurt. I guess I just have mixed feelings about this.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  3.  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, Mar 16th, 2010 @ 9:05pm

    Re: Re: The original

    err.. if the disclosure WAS there before ...

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  4.  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, Mar 16th, 2010 @ 9:07pm

    Re: Re: Re: The original

    oops, sorry. ignore the previous Mar 16th, 2010 @ 9:05pm post (and moderators, please delete it, it was a mistake and I don't want these posts to clutter up your forum).

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  5.  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, Mar 16th, 2010 @ 9:38pm

    wow, score for the good guys

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  6.  
    identicon
    Bob Vila, Mar 16th, 2010 @ 10:12pm

    Giraffes are vicious but rarely cause fatalities. I don't blame the relatives for wanting a second opinion.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  7.  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, Mar 16th, 2010 @ 10:12pm

    Re: Re: The original

    Don't need to disclose that something is satire to make it protected. That's just idiotic.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  8.  
    icon
    Ima Fish (profile), Mar 17th, 2010 @ 5:58am

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]


Add Your Comment

Have a Techdirt Account? Sign in now. Want one? Register here
Get Techdirt’s Daily Email
Save me a cookie
  • Note: A CRLF will be replaced by a break tag (<br>), all other allowable HTML will remain intact
  • Allowed HTML Tags: <b> <i> <a> <em> <br> <strong> <blockquote> <hr> <tt>
Follow Techdirt
A word from our sponsors...
Essential Reading
Techdirt Reading List
Techdirt Insider Chat
A word from our sponsors...
Recent Stories
A word from our sponsors...

Close

Email This