Bloggers ARE NOT Journalists According to California Judge
Well looks like this happened before.
http://www.businessweek.com/technolo...7877_tc024.htm
Quote:
Are Bloggers Journalists?
MARCH 7, 2005
NEWS ANALYSIS
By Jessi Hempel
A judge didn't think so, thus his ruling that three blogs must reveal their sources. The decision has sparked a debate and may chill such sites
A California judge issued a preliminary ruling on Mar. 3 that three bloggers who published leaked information about an unreleased Apple (AAPL ) product must divulge their confidential sources. If the ruling holds, it will set a precedent certain to reverberate through the blogosphere because this means under the law bloggers aren't considered journalists.
o crack down on internal leaks, Apple has taken legal action against three Web logs: PowerPage, Apple Insider, and ThinkSecret. The sites published information about an unreleased product, code-named Asteroid, that Apple considered a trade secret. According to court papers, the company says the people who run these sites aren't "legitimate members of the press," and therefore it has the right to subpoena information that will reveal which Apple employees are violating their confidentiality agreements. In most cases, journalists are protected under the First Amendment and don't have to reveal their sources.
Are Bloggers Journalists?
MARCH 7, 2005
NEWS ANALYSIS
By Jessi Hempel
A judge didn't think so, thus his ruling that three blogs must reveal their sources. The decision has sparked a debate and may chill such sites
A California judge issued a preliminary ruling on Mar. 3 that three bloggers who published leaked information about an unreleased Apple (AAPL ) product must divulge their confidential sources. If the ruling holds, it will set a precedent certain to reverberate through the blogosphere because this means under the law bloggers aren't considered journalists.
o crack down on internal leaks, Apple has taken legal action against three Web logs: PowerPage, Apple Insider, and ThinkSecret. The sites published information about an unreleased product, code-named Asteroid, that Apple considered a trade secret. According to court papers, the company says the people who run these sites aren't "legitimate members of the press," and therefore it has the right to subpoena information that will reveal which Apple employees are violating their confidentiality agreements. In most cases, journalists are protected under the First Amendment and don't have to reveal their sources.
http://www.businessweek.com/technolo...7877_tc024.htm
Comments
Well looks like this happened before.
http://www.businessweek.com/technolo...7877_tc024.htm
Gawker is a lot bigger than AI/TS/Etc, and their general focus using a range of niched *sites* (and linked together much the way a traditional newspaper has sections) gives them more cred than a blog specifically covering apple related news and nought but. Also, it's 5 years later and a lot has changed. Iin particular, Gawker is NYC based, and here in NY, as of march bloggers with sufficient coverage can get press credentials. I'm sure gawker has credentials for their coverage of NYC events now, and though IANAL, I could see that playing into how the case is handled in cali.
Jornalists are not protected from purchasing stolen merchandise, and the stakes are a lot higher in CA. The real determination will be whether the phone should be considered stolen, since, the person who found it attempted to return it.
Gizmondo didn't help their defense with their 'burning a hole in our pants' statement though. One might say they admitted to Apple they knew it was 'hot.'