The decision in the Apple v. Does case, in which I am proud to have participated in a tiny way (as signatory to an amicus brief), just came down, and it is a win for the wider universe of bloggers and other Internet-based writers and self-publishers.
See Lauren Gelman’s report. Here’s the ruling (PDF). Here’s a release from EFF. More after I’ve had a chance to read in full.
This appears to be one key passage:
We decline the implicit invitation to embroil ourselves in questions of what constitutes “legitimate journalis[m].” The shield law is intended to protect the gathering and dissemination of news, and that is what petitioners did here. We can think of no workable test or principle that would distinguish “legitimate” from “illegitimate” news. Any attempt by courts to draw such a distinction would imperil a fundamental purpose of the First Amendment, which is to identify the best, most important, and most valuable ideas not by any sociological or economic formula, rule of law, or process of government, but through the rough and tumble competition of the memetic marketplace. |
Any judge who uses the phrase “memetic marketplace” seems to have immersed himself fully in the subject!
Post Revisions:
There are no revisions for this post.