Welcome to the Citizen Media Law Brief, a weekly newsletter highlighting recent blog posts, media law news, legal threat entries, and other new content on the Citizen Media Law Project's website. You are receiving this email because you have expressed interest in the CMLP or registered on our site, www.citmedialaw.org. If you do not wish to receive this newsletter, you can unsubscribe by following the link at the bottom of this email or by going to http://www.citmedialaw.org/newsletter/subscriptions.

* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
The latest from the Citizen Media Law Project blog...

Sam Bayard analyzes the difference between fact and opinion in Liskula Cohen's recent case.
Anonymity of "Skanks in NYC" Blogger Could Hinge on Fact-Opinion Divide

David Ardia reports on a recent dispute over political videos. 
Fox Television Forces Shutdown of Progress Illinois' YouTube Channel

Sam Bayard updates readers on developments in the GateHouse Media case.
GateHouse Media v. New York Times Trial Set for Late January

Dan Gillmor comments on the difference between government censorship and corporate blacklisting.
Authors: Government Censorship Better than Corporate

CMLP Staff discuss some of the significant legal issues presented by the GateHouse Media case.
Preliminary Thoughts on GateHouse Media v. New York Times Company

* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
Recent threats added to the CMLP database...

Cohen v. Google (Blogger)
Posted Jan. 6, 2009

Fox Television WFLD-TV v. Progress Illinois
Posted Jan. 6, 2009

Pressler v. Mills
Posted Jan. 5, 2009

Oxford Round Table, Inc. v. Mahone
Posted Dec. 29, 2008 

DiAdamo v. Duggan
Posted Dec. 22, 2008 

* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
Other citizen media law news...

After Police Relent, Bloggers Get Press Credentials
New York Times - Fri. 01/09/09

LA judge hears bid to dismiss MySpace conviction
Washington Post - Thurs. 01/08/09

Good Judgment by the Martin Luther King Estate in Not Misusing Trademark Law to Suppress Racist Speech
Consumer Law & Policy Blog - Wed. 01/07/09

Yelp user faces lawsuit over negative review
CNET News - Tues. 01/06/09

More Twittering From the Courtroom
Legal Blog Watch - Tues. 01/06/09

* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
The full(er) Brief...

"Since the story broke in the New York Daily News on Tuesday, there has been a deluge of articles and posts (for example here, here, here, and here) on supermodel Liskula Cohen and her quest for a court order requiring Google/Blogger.com to reveal the identity of the anonymous publisher of the Skanks in NYC blog.  Beyond its gossipy exterior, the case raises the interesting and important question of what kinds of statements can support a defamation claim. . . .  As a general matter, defamation requires a false statement of fact, and the First Amendment protects statements of 'pure opinion.'  The constitutional protection for statements of opinion shields the expression of subjective beliefs, ideas, and criticisms even when doing so is hurtful or offensive to others.  It also protects one's ability to use hyperbole and colorful or extreme language when it is clear these are rhetorical ploys rather than assertions of fact. . . .  The statements at issue in Cohen's case defy easy characterization as fact or opinion. . . ."
Sam Bayard, Anonymity of "Skanks in NYC" Blogger Could Hinge on Fact-Opinion Divide

"Progress Illinois, which 'provides online news and commentary on issues important to Illinois working families and the progressive movement at large,' has had its YouTube channel terminated after receiving three notices of copyright infringement from Fox Television Stations, Inc. arising from the organization's use of news footage from WFLD-TV, the Fox affiliate in Chicago. . . .  Fox's heavy-handed response to Progress Illinois' use of its clips highlights the network's myopic view of the media ecosystem in which it operates.  Rather than seeing Progress Illinois as a competitor attempting to steal website traffic from WFLD-TV, the network should be grateful that its political coverage is generating buzz in the blogosphere. . . ."
David Ardia, Fox Television Forces Shutdown of Progress Illinois' YouTube Channel

"Things are moving quickly in the GateHouse Media v. New York Times Company lawsuit we posted about (here, here) before the holidays.  Judge Young of the United States District Court for the District of Massachusetts decided to combine GateHouse's motion for a preliminary injunction with a full trial on the merits and initially set the hearing for today.  By agreement of the parties, the court extended the trial date, which will now begin 'on or after January 26, 2009.' . . .   This expedited schedule suggests what we might have guessed -- fundamentally the dispute is about the law rather than the facts.  Among other potentially important rulings, Judge Young may have to decide whether aggregating headlines and ledes from other websites constitutes copyright infringement or fair use, and whether linking back to a source website for purposes of attribution can be trademark infringement.  Needless to say, the answers could have serious implications for the future of online media. . . ."
Sam Bayard, GateHouse Media v. New York Times Trial Set for Late January

"LA Observed has a post about how KRON TV in San Francisco disinvited the authors of a new book from a talk-show appearance after discovering that the book, No Time to Think: The Menace of Media Speed and the 24-hour News Cycle, takes shots at the crappy state of local TV news. My initial reaction was incredulity. I mean, how clueless is that kind of move? . . .  Then I read the entire item, which includes an outraged email from the authors — Howard Rosenberg, formerly of the LA Times, and Charles Feldman — in which they write, among other things, the following line: Government censorship is not nearly as bad as is corporate censorship–especially by a company that serves the public—or ought to. I find myself hoping that the email by the authors is a fake. If it’s real, the authors need a refresher course in First Amendment 101, not to mention reality. The most likely explanation for the authors’ ridiculous statement is that a) they were pissed; b) they wrote their outraged note in haste; and c) they didn’t proofread it before they sent it along. . . ."
Dan Gillmor, Authors: Government Censorship Better than Corporate

"Like a storm coming over the horizon, the recent lawsuit filed by GateHouse Media against the New York Times Company, which operates Boston.com, has thrown the CMLP into disarray just as we were preparing to depart to warmer climes for the holidays. . .  For those who haven't yet heard about this case, here is a bit of background.  On December 22, 2008, GateHouse Media, which operates more than 375 newspapers and associated websites, filed a lawsuit against the New York Times Company in U.S. District Court in Massachussets, claiming, among other things, that headlines from -- and links to -- GateHouse content on Boston.com's "Your Town" sites constitute copyright and trademark infringement.  The New York Times, which owns the Boston Globe, operates local sites — currently in Newton, Needham, and Waltham, MA — that aggregate local content from the Globe, area blogs, and other newspaper websites, including GateHouse's Wicked Local websites. . . .  GateHouse filed an eight count complaint alleging breach of contract, copyright infringement, false advertising, trademark infringement, trademark dilution, unfair competition, and unfair business practices.  On the same day it filed the complaint, GateHouse also filed a motion for a temporary restraining order and preliminary injunction. . . ."
CMLP Staff, Preliminary Thoughts on GateHouse Media v. New York Times Company