Posted by Eugene Volokh:
The District Court's Decision To Allow Gavel-To-Gavel Webcast in a File-Sharing
Lawsuit
http://volokh.com/archives/archive_2009_04_12-2009_04_18.shtml#1239920460
has just been reversed by the First Circuit in [1]In re Sony BMG Music
Entertainment. The court relies chiefly on the text of a District of
Massachusetts local rule, but also suggests that the Judicial
Conference's policy for federal courts likewise cuts against such
webcasting. And though the policies involved bar "televising," the
court concludes that
The difference between televising and webcasting is one of degree
rather than kind. Both are broadcast mediums. The absence of a
specific reference to webcasting is not telling; both at the time
when the policy was promulgated and at the time when the resolution
was adopted, Internet webcasting had not attained the ubiquity that
currently prevails. What is more significant is that the intention
of both the Judicial Conference, and the circuit council is
transparently clear. That intention is to forbid all broadcasting
of federal district court proceedings in civil cases, save only for
the enumerated exceptions. The webcasting that the district court
authorized contravenes that intention.
The court also rejects the argument that there's a First Amendment
right to have proceedings webcast:
While the new technology characteristic of the Information Age may
call for the replotting of some boundaries, the venerable right of
members of the public to attend federal court proceedings is far
removed from an imagined entitlement to view court proceedings
remotely on a computer screen.
This is no surprise, since that has been the view of the federal
courts on the subject for quite some time.
Careful students of the First Circuit will be able to guess who wrote
the opinion when I tell them that the opinion uses the words
"impuissant," "perscrutation," and "sockdolager." Going through the
Google results for "perscrutation" reveals only 324 items (as usual,
including some junk pages), though I'm sure there will be more soon.
References
1. http://www.ca1.uscourts.gov/pdf.opinions/09-1090P-01A.pdf
_______________________________________________
Volokh mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.powerblogs.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/volokh
