Eugene Volokh Article on Freedom of the Press As An Industry, or For the Press as a Technology? From The Framing to Today.

"“[T]he freedom . . . of the press” specially protects the press as an industry, which is to say newspapers, television stations, and the like - so have argued some judges and scholars, such as the Citizens United v. FEC dissenters and Justices Stewart, Powell, and Douglas.

This argument is made in many contexts: election-related speech, libel law, the journalist’s privilege, access to government property, and more.

Some lower courts have indeed concluded that some First Amendment constitutional protections apply only to the institutional press, and not to book authors, political advertisers, writers of letters to the editor, professors who post material on their websites, or people who
are interviewed by newspaper reporters.

Sometimes, this argument is used to support weaker protection for non-institutional-press speakers than is already given to institutional-press speakers. At other times, it is used to support greater protection for institutional-press speakers than they already get. The argument in the latter set of cases is that the greater protection can be limited to institutionalpress speakers, and so will undermine rival government interests less than if the greater protection were extended to all speakers."

..

"Of course, the Supreme Court has never limited itself to analyzing constitutional provisions based solely on historical sources. Justices remain free to decide for themselves what they think best serves the values they deem protected by constitutional provisions.

The goal of this Article is simply to say that an argument for a press-as-industry interpretation of the Free Press Clause must rely on something other than original meaning, text, purpose, tradition, or precedent."

Source of Quote and Full Eugene Volokh Article on Freedom of the Press
http://www2.law.ucla.edu/volokh/press.pdf

Custody Order Violates First and Fourteenth Amendments of the U.S. Constitution

"In a Family Courtroom in Bucks County, PA, Judge Diane E. Gibbons recently ordered a father to take down a website, a blog actually, called: ThePsychoExWife.com. A portion of this site is dedicated to telling a story, based on true events, regarding a very contentious divorce and custody battle with this ex-wife. The purpose of the website was to attract others going through similarly difficult divorce and custody situations in order to help them manage theirs better. The Father, in this case, was ordered to shut it down under threat of incarceration and/or risk losing custody of his children.

Judge Diane E. Gibbons has violated the father’s civil rights by ordering him to remove the blog. Fact is, he neither owns the website nor the content. The existence of the website, in and of itself, has no affect on his children. It would forever remain so, provided both parents monitor the children’s computer usage as any good parent should."

You can read the full transcript of Judge Diane E. Gibbons orders here.

Source of Above Quote and lot's more on this Case Click Below
http://www.savethepsychoexwife.com/

Motion for Reconsideration
http://www.savethepsychoexwife.com/motion-for-reconsideration/

Emeritus News - Alternative News Source - Independent News Source

http://www.emeritusnews.com/

"Emeritus News is an independent, social enterprise, not affiliated with any other organization or business. Our focused selection of consumer and public affairs stories is designed for our time challenged followers, eager to be informed about the issues that matter most."

Source of Emeritus News Quote
http://www.emeritusnews.com/6553.html

Anti-Corruption Blogger Crystal Cox Says, a Bit About the iViewit Technology Court Case. Crystal Cox regarding the Eliot Bernstein Story, and Justice for the iViewit Inventors

What if This was Your Invention, Stolen by the Patent Attorneys
that You Hired to get you a Patent?



More on the iViewit Technology Case


http://www.DeniedPatent.com/
http://www.iViewit.tv/

FBI, SEC Complaint, iViewithttp://iviewit.tv/CompanyDocs/20100206%20FINAL%20SEC%20FBI%20and%20more%20COMPLAINT%20Against%20Warner%20Bros%20Time%20Warner%20AOL176238nscolorlow.pdf
http://www.investigativejournalist.net/2011/02/open-letter-to-time-warner-warner-bros.html Investigative Blogger Crystal Cox, Open Letter to Intel Shareholders

http://www.investigativejournalist.net/2011/02/open-letter-to-intel-corp-board-of.html Investigative Blogger Crystal Cox, Open Letter to Warner Bros. Shareholders

http://intelcorruption.blogspot.com/
Investigative Blogger Crystal Cox Blog On Paul Otelline
Formerly CeoPaulOtellini.com
http://www.alexisdevane.com/ This Blog was Formerly KennethRubenstein.com 
http://www.proskauerfraud.com/
http://ceopaulotellini.blogspot.com/
http://jeffreybewkes.blogspot.com/
http://iviewit.tv/wordpress/?p=498
http://www.investigativejournalist.net/2011/02/intel-corp-intc-press-release-on-mass.html
http://www.foley-lardner.com/
http://www.greenbergtraurigsucks.com/
http://www.proskauerlawfirm.com/ Formerly ProskauerSucks.com 
Christopher C. Wheeler, Proskauer Rose Attorney
Formerly ChristopherCWheeler.com
http://christophercwheeler.blogspot.com/
Mathew Triggs, Proskauer Rose Attorney http://matthewtriggscom.blogspot.com/
Eliot Bernstein, iViewit Founder and One of the Inventorshttp://www.EliotBernstein.com/
Raymond Joao Proskauer Rose
Formerly RaymondJoao.comhttp://raymondjoao.blogspot.com/
http://www.scottsherr.com/ Scott Sherr Sony
http://www.toddoutten.com/ Todd Outten
http://douglaschey.blogspot.com/ Formerly DouglasChey.com

Crystal Cox Vs. Marc Randazza Attorney. Marc Randazza is Defaming Crystal Cox with "Actual Malice". Marc Randazza is Flat Out Lying, Marc Randazza, Randazza Legal Group.

This summary is not available. Please click here to view the post.