well you left out the last part of the sentence :-P It says "for financial gain or livelihood, is engaged in journalism" ... if you're livelihood is gained from a day job, and you aren't getting paid to cover a story ...you' aren't engaged in journalism for financial gain or livelihood and it sounds like this shield wouldn't protect you in this case.
I mean I can hear it so clearly: "Your honor, Mr. Fox earns his livelihood as a dog walker, and receives no financial gain from his blog ... clearly he is not protected by blah blah" or "The law clearly states that protected journalism is that which provides financial gain and livelihood to the journalist ... Mr Fox get no such compensation and therefore is not a journalist as far as this law is concerned blah blah blah" IANAL ... but I wouldn't count on this wording protecting a blogger from the DOJ if they've got some other "day job" and nobody is paying them to over a given story. ... but it's a very interesting turn of event in anycase. On 10/17/07, Jay dedman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > So legally, you aren't a journalist unless you're a commercial journalist, > > huh? Funny, other 'professions' like medicine and the law aren't tied to > > such mercenary considerations. > > im not sure i read it that way. > i think they define it as someone who regularly reports on something, > has a track record of reporting. > This is basically what a blogger can be if they are dedicated to a topic. > > I do agree that it's trubling to read "for financial gain or livelihood". > does this mean you must get paid by a commercial company? > can you just get donations from the community? > can you have a day job and blog at night? > > Jay > > > > Yahoo! Groups Links > > > > -- http://www.DavidMeade.com
