1. corpuscallosum
  2. HR 2102 IH -- Free Flow of Information Act of 2007

HR 2102 IH -- Free Flow of Information Act of 2007

By j7uy5 on August 2, 2007.

HR 2102 IH -- Free Flow of Information Act of 2007



US Reps , href="http://mikepence.house.gov/">Mike Pence, rel="tag" href="http://www.house.gov/conyers/">John
Conyers, rel="tag">Howard Coble, href="http://yarmuth.house.gov/" rel="tag">John
Yarmuth, and rel="tag">Greg Walden have introduced a bill that
would provide some protections to blogger-journalists.  



HR 2102 IH, the href="http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/z?c110%3AH.R.2102%3A">Free
Flow of Information Act of 2007, so far has only
been approved by the House
Judiciary Committee.



The Corresponding Senate Bill is S. 1267, introduced by href="http://lugar.senate.gov/" rel="tag">Richard
Lugar, , , and href="http://landrieu.senate.gov/hrt/index.cfm" rel="tag">Mary
Lanrieu.  



The nice thing about it is that it would place restrictions on the
ability of the Court to compel bloggers to reveal confidential sources
of information, to provide testimony, or to turn over documents.
 The same limits would apply to communications service
providers.



The Bill defines Journalism as follows:




JOURNALISM-
The term `journalism' means the gathering, preparing, collecting,
photographing, recording, writing, editing, reporting, or publishing of
news or information that concerns local, national, or international
events or other matters of public interest for dissemination to the
public.



Persons covered under the Act would include:



COVERED
PERSON- The term `covered person' means a person engaged in journalism
and includes a supervisor, employer, parent, subsidiary, or affiliate
of such covered person.



Good news for parents, there.



The Bush administration had href="http://news.zdnet.com/2100-11153_22-6191053.html?tag=nl">expressed
opposition to the Bill.  In response, the authors of
the Bill may narrow the scope somewhat to href="http://news.zdnet.com/2100-11153_22-6200188.html">include
only persons who make money by blogging.  The thing
about that, is that anyone can run Google Ads or something like that,
so it probably would not be much of an exclusion.



Tags
Computing
Politics

More like this

ACTION: let's kill this anti-OA bill before it's even born!
You probably remember the wonderful new NIH law that passed last year: On Dec 26th, 2007, President Bush signed the Bill that requires all NIH-funded research to be made available to the public. The bill mandates all NIH-funded research to be made freely available to public within 12 months of…
Another attempt to restrict your access to scientific research
John Conyers (D., Michigan) is a liberal Democrat. As head of the Judiciary Committee he has always carried water for the IP crowd. He's at it again. And he isn't alone. When it comes to paying off campaign contributers this is a non-partisant issue: These sort of copyright issues cut across the…
Treatment for Adolescents with Depression Study
The Treatment for Adolescents with Depression Study (TADS) is a major NIH-sponsored study of the treatment of adolescents with depression, in which href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fluoxetine" rel="tag">fluoxetine-only, rel="tag">cognitive-behavioral therapy only, combination treatment…
Open Access: The Time to Act is Now
CALL TO ACTION: Ask your Representative to oppose the H.R. 801 - The Fair Copyright in Research Works Act (from the Alliance for Taxpayer Access) February 11, 2009 Last week, the Chairman of the House Judiciary Committee (Rep. John Conyers, D-MI) re-introduced a bill that would reverse the NIH…

I think bloggers should have all the protections and also all the responsibilities of journalism: you are still liable for slander and spreading lies about someone or something.

The whole business about having to make money from it is absurd. One might argue that even a major newspaper that is losing money should then no longer be protected. What if I decide to publish a newsletter or newspaper, that I distribute for free? What if I charge one cent? Does this become black-and-white, one is journalism, one is not?

I think the history of this country is that many journalistic traditions began with someone owning a printing press and posting the output on a tree or structure somewhere.

If this legislation ever passes, it probably will end up looking like a committee that was designed by a camel, or whatever the expression is. That is to say, it will not necessarily make sense.

I agree that the first journalists were "pamphleteers". I suppose it he final legislation the key factor will be, "is it a business?" Business is sacred, after all.

Personally, I would like to see "journalistic intent" as the deciding factor. Admittedly, that is harder to discern than whether or not money changes hands.