Opposition Research Done on Bloggers in VA

This post on http://www.shaunkenney.com/ is not necessarily about the law of blogging, but it does go to make the point that blogs and blog law is a rapidly developing field. As more political candidates do opposition research on bloggers this area of weblog law will become more and more important. Please take the time to read this article and really think about it.

Weblog Law Exclusive - Update on Chapman Defamation Suit

Prince William County – Weblog Law has an exclusive update on Steve Chapman's suit against Black Velvet Bruce Lee and Greg Letiecq.  Mr. Letiecq tells Weblog Law, “I really don't have any update for you beyond what has already been reported. . . . As far as I can tell, Mr. Chapman has no intention of dropping his lawsuit despite the negative publicity it has caused him.”  We will continue to keep you updated.

Blog Sued for Defamation Because it Distracted Candidate

Prince William County – Former 50th District of Virginia House of Delegates candidate Steve Chapman is suing an anonymous blogger, Black Velvet Bruce Lee, and Greg Letiecq, a blogger who took over Black Velvet Bruce Lee and started Black Velvet Bruce Li.  Black Velvet Bruce Lee disappeared and dropped his site and email address.  No one knows or is willing to admit who he/she is.  According to MannassasJM.com:

Steve Chapman has had enough. After threatening Internet bloggers with litigation, the former political candidate took action.
He filed a $200,000 lawsuit against the bloggers for attacking his character on the Web journal, Black Velvet Bruce Lee.
Chapman, 28, is suing for defamation, libel, slander, insulting words and intentional infliction of emotional distress. . . .
Chapman had announced earlier this year that he was a candidate for the Republican nomination for the 50th District House of Delegates.
He became disqualified after he missed the deadline to file and blamed the blog controversy for distracting his campaign.
Chapman said he had no choice but to proceed with the lawsuit since "Black Velvet Bruce Lee" accused him of being a high school dropout among a slue of other allegations.

The suit was filled in early June 2006 and is currently pending.  More can be found on Black Velvet Bruce Lee.  I will continue to follow this story as it develops.  This could be very important to bloggers in the Virginia, especially this campaign season.

Ex-Foley Page Threatens to Sue Blogger

The House Page, Jordan Edmund, exposed in the Mark Foley scandal is threatening to sue ABC and William “Wild Bill” Kerr, the Blogger who revealed his identity.  The webmaster for Passionate America found the actual name of the Page imbedded on a non-linked page on ABC’s website.  Passionate America then took this information and posted in on the site.  (More on what happened can be found on the Drudge Report.)  Foley’s Ex-Page now threatens to sue the Blogger for posting his identity and ABC for having his name online at all.  The actual post and the initial letter from Jordan Edmund’s lawyer can be found on Passionate America.  More on this possible suit and the legal implications for bloggers as this story develops. . .

Defamed, Just Comment

Last year the Delaware Supreme Court ruled that those offended or defamed by a blog had recourse outside of the court system.  It ruled that such a person could post a comment on the blog.  This report is according to the Star Tribune of Minneapolis-St. Paul, MN.  This type of ruling is one that will make most bloggers sleep a little better at night.

Blogging While on a Jury, No Big Deal

The New Hampshire Supreme Court refused to overturn a recent conviction on the grounds that a juror posted to a blog about a trial while on the jury.  According to the ABA Journal Report:

Indeed, prospective jurors and active jurors are already blogging about their past experiences, and at least on one occasion, directly from the courthouse during service.  At the center of the New Hampshire appeal is small-town blogger Scott Vachon of Laconia.  In the days before he was to report for jury duty, Vachon posted this on his blog: "Lucky me, I have jury duty!" and, "Now I get to listen to the local riffraff try and convince me of their innocence." Later, he also posted on the now-defunct blog that he was surprised that after two days of jury selection, he hadn’t been "booted due to any strong beliefs I had about police, God, etc." . . . Yet, because Vachon’s posts weren’t shared with his fellow jurors, and because Vachon assured the trial judge that he had followed his instructions once the jury was seated, the high court didn’t find any error.

The court did, however, leave reason to believe that if it could be shown that the jury saw the blog that it may be considered juror misconduct.  This leaves the door open for all sorts of crazy situations.  The law is defiantly not clear when it comes to this.  The ABA does not seem to take sides but it does quote some individuals that strongly question the courts decision to look at juror blogging on a case by case basis.

Blogger sued over Alleged Defamation

The Star Tribune of Minneapolis-St. Paul, MN reported in January of a case where a Republican Blogger was sued for allegedly defaming a Democrat public consulting firm.  This could be a very crucial case for the blogosphere and those they affect.  As of January the case had not yet been heard.  The blogger, Michael Brodkorb, ran a site called MinnesotaDemocratsExposed.com (MDE).  The article states:

The suit alleges that Brodkorb, citing an unnamed source, defamed the St. Paul-based public relations firm New School Communications when he posted a claim that New School had become publicly critical of the congressional campaign of Coleen Rowley only after Rowley rejected a contract with the firm.
Despite being told that New School does not perform political campaign work, Brodkorb, the suit says, continues to make the claim, even though his source "may, in fact, be a fabrication." . . .
Brodkorb, a former research director for the Minnesota Republican Party, had been widely suspected of being the author of the often-acerbic website, which describes itself as a blog "dedicated to the truthful discussion on the activities, statements and tactics of Minnesota Democrats."  
In the past it has done such things as purchase domain names of [Democratic] candidates so that viewers who log on to an address expecting to see a candidate's website are instead directed to the MDE site.
In a posting called "I AM M.D.E.," Brodkorb, who said his blog work had no connection to the Republican Party, acknowledged he is the author of the blog. He said he wanted to remain anonymous in the past to keep the focus on the subject matter rather than himself.
"It is a testament to my hard work and the work of hundreds of people who have e-mailed me information on Minnesota Democrats that in the end, a lawsuit filed by a prominent Democrat consultant forced my identity to be revealed," he wrote.

Apparently blogging anonymously does not provide protection from law suits being filed.  Lawyers for the firm are claiming that bloggers should be treated as any other journalist.  This case should be interesting to watch as it unfolds.  We will bring you the latest as we find it.

Welcome to Weblog Law

Weblog Law is a blog forum for the purpose of discussion the impact of blogs on the legal system.  We will discuss the legal issues that relate to blogging.  We will attempt to follow the path of suits and cases dealing with blogging.