Spring 2012- Case briefs | MC 3080 - MASS MEDIA LAW, Quizzes of Communication

Download Spring 2012- Case briefs | MC 3080 - MASS MEDIA LAW and more Quizzes Communication in PDF only on Docsity! TERM 1 Schenck v. United States (1919) DEFINITION 1 Summary: Charles Schenck distributed anti-draft pamphlets through the mail, violating Espionage Act of 1917. Supreme Court upheld the Espionage Act because in times of war, extra protection is needed. The distribution was called an act, and therefore was not protected as free speech.Rule of Law: Under the first Amendment, the government cannot restrict speech unless it poses a clear and present danger to society. TERM 2 Brandenburg v. Ohio (1969) DEFINITION 2 Summary: Clarence Brandenburg invited camera crew to film KKK rally. Arrested and found guilty of violating the Ohio Criminal Syndicalism Statute. Supreme Court decided the statute was unconstitutional. Speeches made in advocacy do not directly incite actions. Rule of Law: Under the First and Fourteenth Amendments, a state may not regulate speech unless it constitutes incitement to imminent lawless actions. TERM 3 United States v. O'Brien (1968) DEFINITION 3 Summary: David Paul O'Brien and 3 companions burned their Selective Service cards outside South Boston Courthouse, violating an amendment to the Universal Military and Service Training Act. Supreme Court upheld the Act and said free speech cannot encompass "symbolic speech." Rule of Law: Under the First Amendment, the Government may regulate expressive conduct if it has a compelling governmental interest that is unrelated to the suppression of the freedom of speech. TERM 4 Texas v. Johnson (1989) DEFINITION 4 Summary: Protesters during 1984 Republican Convention set a U.S. flag on fire, and the instigator was convicted of violating a Texas statute that prohibited the desecration of a national or state flag. Supreme Court found the statute unconstitutional because the First Amendment is said to include symbolic speech, and acts can't be regulated just because some may find them offensive. Rule of Law: Under the First and Fourteenth Amendments, the government may not regulate expression unless there is a compelling governmental interest in doing so. TERM 5 United States v. Stevens (2010) DEFINITION 5 Summary: Robert J. Stevens' business sold videos of dog fights, in violation of a congressional statute that banned depictions of animal cruelty. Supreme Court found the statute unconstitutional for being overbroad. Rule of Law: Under the First and Fourteenth Amendments depictions of animal cruelty may not as a class be prohibited by the First Amendment, and the law is therefore overbroad. TERM 6 Brown v. Entertainment Merchants Association (2011) DEFINITION 6 Summary: The Entertainment Merchants Association challenged a statute requiring a label of "18" on video games that depicted "killing, dismembering, maiming and sexual assault." Supreme Court upheld protection of the game industry as an art form under the First Amendment. Rule of Law: The state cannot regulate violent content to children because it has no compelling interest in doing so. TERM 7 Near v. Minnesota (1931) DEFINITION 7 Summary: Saturday Press was permanently enjoined for violating a Minnesota statute banning defamatory content. The articles in question were about local law enforcement's failure to pursue Jewish gangsters' role in gambling, bootlegging and racketeering. Supreme Court said the statute imposed prior restraint and was unconstitutional. Rule of Law: Under the First and Fourteenth Amendments, a state may not impose prior restraint against publication except in very narrow cases. TERM 8 New York Times Co. v. U.S. (1971) DEFINITION 8 Summary: The Times was leaked the Pentagon Papers and published them in pieces. Nixon Administration secured a court injunction and publication was enjoined. Supreme Court ruled that the government had censored the Times, constituting violation of its First Amendment rights. Rule of Law: Under the First Amendment, the Government may not impose a prior restraint of publication unless there is an immediate threat to national security and the burden of proof on the government is high. TERM 9 U.S. v. The Progressive (1979) DEFINITION 9 Summary: Progressive magazine sent a copy of an article on how to build a hydrogen bomb to the Department of Energy for fact verification, and its confidential info was found to violate the Atomic Energy Act of 1954. Supreme Court rules that the public has no need to know technical info on the bomb and publishing it poses a threat to national security. Rule of Law: Under the First Amendment, the government may restrain publication if it possesses direct, immediate, and irreparable harm to national security and/or interest. TERM 10 Smith v. The Daily Mail (1979) DEFINITION 10 Summary: After another paper's publication of the name and photo of a minor accused of killing a classmate, Charleston Daily Mail follows up its initial article with this info. Supreme Court said punishment after publication constitutes prior restraint ant the state's interest was not sufficient enough to warrant a criminal penalty. Rule of Law: Under the First and Fourteenth Amendments, a state may not punish the media for information lawfully obtained unless there is a compelling governmental interest. TERM 21 Olivia N. v. National Broadcasting Company (1981) DEFINITION 21 Summary: A group of minors raped Olivia N. with a bottle, claiming to have been inspired by the made-for TV movie "Born Innocent." Olivia sued NBC for not placing a disclaimer before the broadcast and negligence. Supreme Court held the broadcast couldn't be proven to incite criminal activity. Rule of Law: Under the First and Fourteenth Amendments, the media cant be held liable for the harmful effects of their content unless the plaintiff can prove incitement. TERM 22 Rice v. Palladin Enterprise (1997) DEFINITION 22 Summary: Paladin printed a how-to book for hit men. Family members of the victims of a triple homicide sued the publisher after its book was found to be in the possession of the killer. Supreme Court held the work could not be protected because it explained how to commit a crime and had no other communicative value. Rule of Law: Under the First and Fourteenth Amendments, a state may impose liability against the media for speech that aids or abets crimes. TERM 23 Hustler Magazine v. Falwell (1988) DEFINITION 23 Summary: Well-known televangelist Jerry Falwell's name and picture was included in a parody ad in Hustler with a small disclaimer. Supreme Court held the ad could not be reasonably regarded as true, and censoring could further limit other satire protected under the First Amendment. Rule of Law: Under the First and Fourteenth Amendments, public figures and officials may not recover damages for intentional infliction of emotional distress by publication unless they prove a false statement was made with actual malice. TERM 24 Snyder v. Phelps (2011) DEFINITION 24 Summary: Westboro Baptist Church picketed the funeral of Marine Lance Cpl. Snyder in protest of the Iraq War. His family sued. Supreme Court called upon freedom of religion rights to decide the church could not be punished for the outrageousness of their actions, especially because it was done on a public sidewalk. Rule of Law: Under the First and Fourteenth Amendment, a state may not impose liability for intentional infliction of emotional distress, unless the speech is a public concern and conducted in a public forum. TERM 25 Rideau v. Louisiana (1963) DEFINITION 25 Summary: Rideau confessed to his crimes (kidnapping three bank employees and killing one) in a videotaped police interrogation. A local news station broadcast the tape several times. His attorney's request for a change of venue was denied. Supreme Court ruled the lower courts had denied due process of law. Rule of Law: Under the First and Sixth Amendments, pre-trial publicity in the form of trial by television can result in denial of due process but actual evidence of prejudiced is not required. TERM 26 Sheppard v. Maxwell (1966) DEFINITION 26 Summary: The media negatively portrayed Dr. Sam Sheppard in a way that made him seem guilty of his wife's murder, and he was eventually convicted. Supreme Court granted a writ of habeas corpus and said the trial was unfair. The trial court judge should have protected Sheppard by restricting court coverage to only that which pertained to the case. Rule of Law: Under the Sixth Amendment, the failure of a trial judge to protect a defendant from the effects of publicity can result in a denial of due process. TERM 27 Nebraska Press Association v. Stuart (1976) DEFINITION 27 Summary: The District Court judge in a multiple-murder case restricted the media's right to publish certain evidence from the case before a jury was selected. Supreme Court decided the case did not meet the exceptional circumstances required to impose prior restraint. Rule of Law: Under the First and Fourteenth amendment, a judge cannot issue prior restraint to ensure due process unless there is a clear and present danger to the administration of justice. TERM 28 Richmond Newspapers v. Virginia (1980) DEFINITION 28 Summary: The fourth trial of a man accused of killing a hotel manager (1 conviction overturned on appeal, 2 mistrials) was closed to the public. Richmond Newspapers protested the restriction. Plurality opinion of Supreme Court agreed to overturn the restriction because of the historical importance to the justice system in open court proceedings. Rule of Law: Under the First and Fourteenth Amendments, a judge can restrict public and media access to court proceedings only if there is a specific reason for the restraint. TERM 29 Globe Newspaper Co. v. Superior Court (1982) DEFINITION 29 Summary: Trial judge ordered closed court for preliminary hearings in a case of the rape of 3 teenage girls and Globe challenged the closure. Massachusetts statute ordered mandatory closure of rape cases. Supreme Court found the statute to not contain enough interest to force mandatory closures, even though the intent to protect sex crime victims is compelling. Rule of Law: Under the First and Fourteenth Amendment, a state law that mandates closure during the testimony of a minor rape victim is unconstitutional. TERM 30 Press Enterprise Co. v. Riverside County Superior Court (1986) DEFINITION 30 Summary: Press Enterprise requested transcripts of a closed hearing involving a nurse's murder of 12 patients, which was denied. Supreme Court overturned and cited the public's right of access. Rule of Law: Under the First and Fourteenth Amendments, the press and the public have the right to attend a pretrial hearing unless there is a substantial probability that the defendant's right to a fair trial will be impaired and no alternative measures would be effective. TERM 31 Chandler v. Florida (1981) DEFINITION 31 Summary: Florida Code of Judicial Conduct permitted television coverage of trials. The attorneys of two police officers on trial filed a motion to declare the code unconstitutional, were denied, and moved for a new trial after a guilty verdict. Supreme Court said photographed or videotaped coverage is not inherently a denial of due process. Rule of Law: Under the Sixth Amendment, cameras in the courtroom are not per se denial of due process and states are free to experiment with cameras in the courtroom. TERM 32 Branzburg v. Hayes (1972) DEFINITION 32 Summary: This case is the consolidation of four cases involving journalists with anonymous sources who were sued after refusing to testify against those they had witnessed involved in criminal activity. Supreme Court decided the pursuit of justice takes precedence over informing the public of criminal activity through unnamed sources. Rule of Law: Under the First amendment, reporters have no right to refuse to testify before a grand jury. TERM 33 Cohen v. Cowles Media Co. (1991) DEFINITION 33 Summary: Cowles media newspapers revealed the source of an article about a political nominee's criminal past. The opposing party's promoter was fired and sued for breach of contract and misrepresentation. Supreme Court decided a charge of promissory estoppel, not breach of contract, was allowable under the First Amendment because it doesn't specifically target the press. Rule of Law: The First Amendment does not bar breach of promise (promissory estoppel) action against the media because such laws are general in nature and do not target the media. TERM 34 Zurcher v. The Stanford Daily (1978) DEFINITION 34 Summary: The Daily published articles and photos of a clash between protesters and police, and a warrant was issued to search the newsroom for more images. Supreme Court decided the warrant was justifiable because it shouldn't cause a decrease in informants or a suppression of news distribution. Rule of Law: Under the First and Fourth amendments, the news media have no special immunity from searches for criminal evidence when it is reasonably suspected that evidence is present on the premises. TERM 35 First National Bank of Boston v. Bellotti (1978) DEFINITION 35 Summary: The bank wanted to publicize its views on a proposed amendment that would place a graduated tax on income. Mass. statute prohibited private corporations from trying to influence the vote, which the bank said was unconstitutional. Supreme Court overturned the statute as both over- and under-inclusive and said the governmental interest was lacking. Rule of Law: Under the First and Fourteenth Amendments, speech does not lose its protection simply because its source is a corporation. TERM 46 Ashcroft v. Free Speech Coalition (2002) DEFINITION 46 Summary: Adult entertainment trade assoc. said Child Pornography Prevention Act threatened their activities and filed suit. Supreme Court overturned the Act for being overbroad and unconstitutional. Virtual depictions of children does not specifically classify child exploitation. Rule of Law: The part of the CPPA that regulates dissemination of virtual child pornography is unconstitutional because it doesn't fulfill the governmental objective of preventing child exploitation. TERM 47 Federal Communications Commission v. Pacifica Foundation (1978) DEFINITION 47 Summary: NY radio station broadcast George Carlin's "Filthy Words" monologue and prefaced it with a sensitive language warning. Supreme Court was influence by ease of access to children, and said the rights of the listener were violated. Rule of Law: Under the Communications Act, the FCC has the authority to regulate content that is indecent but not obscene, and such regulation doesnt violate the First Amendment. TERM 48 Reno v. American Civil Liberties Union (1997) DEFINITION 48 Summary: Two provisions of the Communications Decency Act tried to protect minors on the Internet. Supreme Court found the statute in violation of the First Amendment and noted its vague description of what classifies "indecency" on the Internet. Rule of Law: Under the First Amendment, a standard of strict scrutiny must be applied to regulation of indecency on the Internet. TERM 49 Harper & Row v. Nation Enterprises (1985) DEFINITION 49 Summary: Former president Ford contracted Harper & Row to publish his memoirs, which then negotiated a deal with Time Magazine to publish snippets of the book before publication. Nation Magazine scooped Time and was sued under Copyright Revision Act. Supreme Court held that the publication was not fair use. Rule of Law: The unauthorized use of another's unpublished manuscript is not protected under the First Amendment just because it contains matters of public interest, but must be evaluated under the fair use doctrine. TERM 50 Metro-Goldwyn-Mayer v. Grokster (2005) DEFINITION 50 Summary: MGM sued peer-to-peer websites for copyright infringement. Grokster acknowledged its software's use in sharing copyrighted materials, but it did not censor users. Supreme Court held that Grokster's promotions as a file-sharing site made them liable for infringements made by third parties. Rule of Law: Under the common law of copyright, the intended sale of software intended to induce infringement or copying is a form of contributory infringement even if the software can be used for a legal purpose. TERM 51 International News Service v. Associated Press (1918) DEFINITION 51 Summary: INS bribed AP writers and reproduced AP work as its own. AP sued for unfair competition. Supreme Court ruled the practices of INS constituted unfair competition, even though it agreed the news itself can't be copyrighted. Rule of Law: The unauthorized taking of anothers investment of time, effort, and money is a form of misappropriation.