This should slow down some of those who use legal threats to stifle free speech.
http://www.nytimes.com/2006/05/27/technology/27apple.html?ex=1306382400&en=ed69a656ccb3473e&ei=5088&partner=rssnyt&emc=rssA California appeals court ruled Friday that online reporters are protected by the same confidentiality laws that protect traditional journalists, striking a blow to efforts by Apple Computer to identify people who leaked confidential company data.
The three-judge panel in San Jose overturned a trial court's ruling last year that to protect its trade secrets, Apple was entitled to know the source of leaked data published online. The appeals court also ruled that a subpoena issued by Apple to obtain electronic communications and materials from an Internet service provider was unenforceable.
In its ruling, the appeals court said online and offline journalists are equally protected under the First Amendment. "We can think of no workable test or principle that would distinguish 'legitimate' from 'illegitimate' news," the opinion states. "Any attempt by courts to draw such a distinction would imperil a fundamental purpose of the First Amendment."
A sensible ruling, if new laws are proposed at least the situation is clear on this matter, an important one at that.
