By: E&P Staff A Texas court has ruled that a reporter for an online magazine can enjoy the same protections as a regular electronic and print reporter under Texas law. However, the court also ruled that not all Internet communicators are subject to the same protections.
The Court of Appeals for the 2nd District of Texas in Fort Worth issued the ruling in "Kaufman v. Islamic Society of Arlington" on June 25.
In September of 2007, Joe Kaufman, wrote an article called "Fanatic Muslim Family Day" for Front Page magazine, an online publication of the David Horowitz Freedom Center. Kaufman called for protests of "Muslim Family Day," an event organized by the Islamic Circle of North America (INCA) Dallas at an Arlington, Tex. amusement park. Kaufman stated that the ICNA had supported and financed terrorism.
Several Islamic groups sued Kaufman, claiming he unfairly and inaccurately linked them to the ICNA. Kaufman moved for summary judgment, which was denied. It was this decision that Kaufman appealed to the 2nd District Court of Appeals. In Texas, the right to appeal a denial of summary judgment is enjoyed by all "electronic or print media."
The Islamic groups challenged Kaufman's status as a media member, claiming that Kaufman had not been trained as a journalist, and that he used Front Page Magazine as his own blog.
The court ruled in favor of Kaufman, and set out a series of tests to determine whether online writers can be considered media members. The test included "[t]he character and text of the communication," "[t]he editorial processes of the Web site or online publication," "[t]he volume of the communication?s dissemination," "[t]he author?s 'extrinsic notoriety unconnected to the communication,'" and "[t]he author?s 'compensation for or professional relationship to making the communication,'" according to Douglas Lee in an article for the First Amendment Center's Web site.
To read the court's decision in full, go
here.
Comments
No comments on this item Please log in to comment by clicking here