Wednesday, October 11, 2006
Online defamation worth $11.3 million?
Update Oct. 12:
Along with posting this item yesterday, I sent a note to "letters @ editor and publisher.com" asking if E&P has a special reprint arrangement with USA Today. I got a reply today from editor Greg Mitchell, saying E&P does pay the Associated Press for rights -- and that the person who posted the story may have thought it was from AP. E&P removed the story today. In its place is a note saying that "Due to a mix-up, [the story] was not properly credited to USA Today. We regret the error and have deleted the article." For continuity, I've kept my original comment about the E&P story, but moved it into the right column.

Now back to the main topic... that libel judgment...
USA Today:

By Laura Parker, USA TODAY

Posted 10/10/2006 10:07 PM ET; Updated 10/11/2006 10:53 AM ET

A Florida woman has been awarded $11.3 million in a defamation lawsuit against a Louisiana woman who posted messages on the Internet accusing her of being a "crook," a "con artist" and a "fraud."

Legal analysts say the Sept. 19 award by a jury in Broward County, Fla. -- first reported Friday by the Daily Business Review -- represents the largest such judgment over postings on an Internet blog or message board. Lyrissa Lidsky, a University of Florida law professor who specializes in free-speech issues, calls the award "astonishing."

Closing paragraphs:

... Bock says... she doesn't have the money to pay the judgment or hire a lawyer to appeal it. She adds that if the goal of Scheff's lawsuit was to stifle what Bock says online, it worked.

"I don't feel like I can express my opinions," Bock says. "Only one side of the story was told in court. Nobody heard my side."

Posted 10/10/2006 10:07 PM ET
Updated 10/11/2006 10:53 AM ET

Editor & Publisher:

By E&P Staff

Published: October 11, 2006 10:15 AM ET

NEW YORK A Florida woman has been awarded $11.3 million in a defamation lawsuit against a Louisiana woman who posted messages on the Internet accusing her of being a "crook," a "con artist" and a "fraud."

[... etc.]

My original comment:

I guess there's only one way to tell this story...

Hmm... Maybe Editor & Publisher ("America's oldest journal covering the newspaper industry") has some agreement with USA Today to use stories without credit. Even so, adding the "By E&P Staff" tag seems odd, unless Laura Parker works for E&P and moonlights for USA Today.


Here's part of Laura Parker's main USA Today story on the online defamation debate, "Courts are asked to crack down on bloggers, websites":

"In the past two years, more than 50 lawsuits stemming from postings on blogs and website message boards have been filed across the nation. The suits have spawned a debate over how the "blogosphere" and its revolutionary impact on speech and publishing might change libel law.

"Legal analysts say the lawsuits are challenging a mind-set that has long surrounded blogging: that most bloggers essentially are "judgment-proof" because they -- unlike traditional media such as newspapers, magazines and television outlets -- often are ordinary citizens who don't have a lot of money...."

The Associated Press version of the $11 million story does credit USA Today with an interview quote near the end.

Finally, here's Daniel Ostrovsky's South Florida DailyBusinessReview.com item -- the one cited above as breaking the story, although he focused more on the case itself, rather than whether it was a record award in an online libel case, or what it might mean for legions of feisty bloggers.

6:02:17 PM  #  

This Page was last update: 7/27/09; 3:41:26 AM
Copyright 2009 Bob Stepno
Theme Design by Bryan Bell

Click here to visit the Radio UserLand website. Subscribe to "Bob's AEJMC Newspaper Division Blog" in Radio UserLand. Click to see the XML version of this web page. Click here to send an email to the editor of this weblog.