Corporations vs. on-line journalists
Companies to websites: All your base are belong to us!
Sunday, March 13, 2005 by Frogboy | Discussion: WinCustomize News
Yesterday's court ruling in which companies can force on-line journalists to reveal sources could have a dramatic impact on the world of on-line news.
Consider the ramifications, the ruling states that a company (such as Apple or Microsoft or whomever) can demand that a website that has broken a story about something that was confidential (or under NDA) has to reveal its sources to that company.
This is something that print journalists don't have to worry about. Two years ago, when someone leaked that the wife of a white house critic was working for the CIA, the Washington Post journalist was not required to present who his source was. In other words, even when it potentially affected national security, journalists weren't forced to reveal sources.
However, on-line news sources, such as Neowin, could face having to reveal its sources to any corporate entity that deems the information on the site to be confidential.
This ruling, if it stands, could give immense weight to corporations who want to control what information is provided from news sites.
Reply #3 Monday, March 14, 2005 9:19 AM
There is no way a judge is going to give the same protection of professional journalist the same rights as a person who just decided to write something one day.
It is like letting a erson who can be a doctor do sergury but he really isn't liscenced.
It's like letting a person drive without a permit.
Its like letting a person designa building but they are not an Architect.
Plus, this case, had more to do with trade secrets then a breaking story such as Apple CEO quits. If Apple was trying to sue for info relating to a investigation of internal harrassment between co-workers leeking out, maybe that would be a story.
The judge tried to keep this to a case of someone putting trade secrets out for public view. Its not air or right and is already illegal.
How about this... go to school, become a journalist, and start your blog.
Now that would be a case for the court. Private journalist being sued for info.
Reply #4 Monday, March 14, 2005 11:48 AM
What exactly defines a "professional" journalist?
Is CNET.com's full time salaried "journalists" not really journalists? How about the numerous political webzines out there? What about game websites? Is IGN.com not professional either?
Reply #5 Monday, March 14, 2005 2:04 PM
| This is something that print journalists don't have to worry about. |
Actually, it is. The sunshine laws do protect a journalist from having to reveal their source, but that doesn't mean that they cannot be held accountable for doing so. If a judge orders a journalist to reveal their source and they decline, they can be held in contempt of court.
Beyond that, I don't think that the sunshine laws apply to bloggers who received their information from a corporate employee that has most likely broken the terms of their NDA.
Please login to comment and/or vote for this skin.
Welcome Guest! Please take the time to register with us.
There are many great features available to you once you register, including:
- Richer content, access to many features that are disabled for guests like commenting on the forums and downloading skins.
- Access to a great community, with a massive database of many, many areas of interest.
- Access to contests & subscription offers like exclusive emails.
- It's simple, and FREE!
Reply #1 Sunday, March 13, 2005 9:03 PM