<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" media="screen" href="/~d/styles/atom10full.xsl"?><?xml-stylesheet type="text/css" media="screen" href="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~d/styles/itemcontent.css"?><feed xmlns="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom" xmlns:openSearch="http://a9.com/-/spec/opensearch/1.1/" xmlns:blogger="http://schemas.google.com/blogger/2008" xmlns:georss="http://www.georss.org/georss" xmlns:gd="http://schemas.google.com/g/2005" xmlns:thr="http://purl.org/syndication/thread/1.0" xmlns:feedburner="http://rssnamespace.org/feedburner/ext/1.0" gd:etag="W/&quot;C0QCRXkyfyp7ImA9WhFSFEU.&quot;"><id>tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5643940815118766227</id><updated>2013-06-17T11:02:44.797-04:00</updated><category term="message board; reality star" /><category term="Harassment / Stalking" /><category term="corruption; summary judgment" /><category term="Classified information" /><category term="Quixtar" /><category term="public concern" /><category term="trolls" /><category term="Cybersquatting / Trademark" /><category term="Default" /><category term="AP" /><category term="Political Issues" /><category term="Parody" /><category term="Review Site" /><category term="cops" /><category term="Injunction / Restraining Order" /><category term="RipOff Report" /><category term="Criminal Libel" /><category term="NBA" /><category term="anonymous emails" /><category term="NY" /><category term="Discovery" /><category term="Libel Tourism" /><category term="Counterclaims" /><category term="Pending" /><category term="Business Relationship" /><category term="Military" /><category term="Magistrate" /><category term="Article of the Month" /><category term="Wikileaks" /><category term="FRCP 65" /><category term="MLRC" /><category term="Anti-SLAPP" /><category term="Threat" /><category term="Criminal Prosection" /><category term="Sex" /><category term="Attorneys" /><category term="Vexatious litigator" /><category term="Retrial" /><category term="Privacy" /><category term="9th Circuit" /><category term="Recusal" /><category term="Gawker" /><category term="Plea" /><category term="Arts Criticism" /><category term="Apology" /><category term="Content Developer" /><category term="reality star" /><category term="internet; blogger" /><category term="News" /><category term="Remittitur" /><category term="Fair Use" /><category term="emails" /><category term="Sanctions" /><category term="Removal" /><category term="Anonymous Bloggers" /><category term="online; website" /><category term="Family / Personal Relationships" /><category term="Public figure" /><category term="Sources" /><category term="Abuse of Process" /><category term="Immunity" /><category term="Personal Jurisdiction" /><category term="government" /><category term="Mediation" /><category term="Platforms" /><category term="Patents" /><category term="Divorce" /><category term="Damages" /><category term="Defamation" /><category term="Retraction" /><category term="Trade Secrets" /><category term="Florida" /><category term="Protective order" /><category term="Public official" /><category term="User-Generated Content" /><category term="Jail" /><category term="tort; derivative liability" /><category term="Punitive Damages" /><category term="Blog comments" /><category term="Single Publication Rule" /><category term="Sua sponte" /><category term="Viacom" /><category term="Seal" /><category term="Gag order" /><category term="False Light" /><category term="Bombs" /><category term="de" /><category term="Trial" /><category term="Post-Trial Motions" /><category term="Hersh" /><category term="Complaints / Gripe Site" /><category term="political speech" /><category term="Media" /><category term="Impersonation" /><category term="articles" /><category term="Site-Wide Shutdown" /><category term="Twitter" /><category term="Mistrial" /><category term="Conde Nast" /><category term="Real Estate" /><category term="Settlements" /><category term="Internet Service Provider" /><category term="Reprimand" /><category term="zine" /><category term="Social Network (MySpace / FaceBook)" /><category term="Business Claims" /><category term="defamation;" /><category term="Admin" /><category term="E-mails" /><category term="pornography" /><category term="Motion to Quash" /><category term="Opinion" /><category term="Election" /><category term="Celebrity" /><category term="large judgment" /><category term="Shield laws" /><category term="Righthaven" /><category term="Section 230" /><category term="Business/Corporation" /><category term="Insult" /><category term="Unauthorized Computer Access" /><category term="Tribal court" /><category term="Prior restraints / TRO" /><category term="internet" /><category term="DMCA" /><category term="Conviction" /><category term="Bankruptcy" /><category term="Solicitation Statute" /><category term="Cohen" /><category term="revenge porn" /><category term="Deferred prosecution" /><category term="Child Custody" /><category term="Spam" /><category term="Yahoo" /><category term="Religion" /><category term="Alleged Criminality / Impropriety" /><category term="content regulation" /><category term="Employer" /><category term="Court proceedings" /><category term="Anonymous posters" /><category term="Libel" /><category term="Whistleblowers" /><category term="Blogetery" /><category term="Copyright" /><category term="Third Party Advertisements" /><category term="Slander" /><category term="Advertising Networks" /><category term="Business Entity / Corporation" /><category term="Appeal" /><category term="Contempt" /><category term="Judges" /><category term="Gang Membership" /><category term="republication; newspapers; hyperlink; defamation; statute of limitations" /><category term="7th Circuit" /><category term="YouTube" /><category term="Hot News Misappropriation" /><category term="website" /><category term="4th Circuit; internet" /><category term="Cease and Desist" /><category term="Google" /><category term="Community Service" /><category term="online critic; bank; financial condition; CA" /><category term="Texas" /><category term="Educators" /><category term="Dismissed" /><category term="Children" /><category term="Obscenity" /><category term="takedown" /><category term="Fine" /><category term="Statute of Limitations" /><category term="Romantic relationship" /><category term="Probation" /><category term="Summary Judgment" /><category term="BurstNET" /><category term="Withdrawn" /><category term="Foreign" /><category term="presumed damages" /><category term="Domestic Violence" /><category term="Attorney Fees" /><category term="Rhetorical hyperbole" /><category term="Criminal Prosecution" /><category term="commenter" /><category term="Guilty" /><category term="reporter's privilege" /><category term="Subpeona" /><category term="amicus" /><category term="IIED" /><category term="Financial Info" /><category term="Attorney Discipline" /><title>MLRC: Actions Against Online Speech</title><subtitle type="html">This list, maintained by the Media Law Resource Center, lists incidences in the United States in which online speech is threatened, whether through libel suits, criminal investigations, or other means.  If you know of something we missed, please let us know. For more details on this list, see “Notes and Sources” below.</subtitle><link rel="http://schemas.google.com/g/2005#feed" type="application/atom+xml" href="http://mlrcblogsuits.blogspot.com/feeds/posts/default" /><link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="http://mlrcblogsuits.blogspot.com/" /><link rel="next" type="application/atom+xml" href="http://www.blogger.com/feeds/5643940815118766227/posts/default?start-index=26&amp;max-results=25&amp;redirect=false&amp;v=2" /><author><name>Katherine Vogele Griffin</name><uri>http://www.blogger.com/profile/09337708117738805031</uri><email>noreply@blogger.com</email><gd:image rel="http://schemas.google.com/g/2005#thumbnail" width="16" height="16" src="http://img2.blogblog.com/img/b16-rounded.gif" /></author><generator version="7.00" uri="http://www.blogger.com">Blogger</generator><openSearch:totalResults>452</openSearch:totalResults><openSearch:startIndex>1</openSearch:startIndex><openSearch:itemsPerPage>25</openSearch:itemsPerPage><atom10:link xmlns:atom10="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom" rel="self" type="application/atom+xml" href="http://feeds.feedburner.com/MlrcLegalActionsAgainstBloggers" /><feedburner:info uri="mlrclegalactionsagainstbloggers" /><atom10:link xmlns:atom10="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom" rel="hub" href="http://pubsubhubbub.appspot.com/" /><feedburner:emailServiceId>MlrcLegalActionsAgainstBloggers</feedburner:emailServiceId><feedburner:feedburnerHostname>http://feedburner.google.com</feedburner:feedburnerHostname><entry gd:etag="W/&quot;C0YCSX8yeCp7ImA9WhFSFEU.&quot;"><id>tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5643940815118766227.post-7707374429586927965</id><published>2013-06-07T14:35:00.002-04:00</published><updated>2013-06-17T10:59:28.190-04:00</updated><app:edited xmlns:app="http://www.w3.org/2007/app">2013-06-17T10:59:28.190-04:00</app:edited><category scheme="http://www.blogger.com/atom/ns#" term="online; website" /><category scheme="http://www.blogger.com/atom/ns#" term="Libel" /><title>Green Tech v. Watchdog.org</title><content type="html">Green Tech v. Watchdog.org (April 8, 2013)
&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
STATUS:
Suit filed in Mississippi district court. &lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Green Tech sues Online Watchdog for Libel&lt;br /&gt;
Mississippi Business Journal&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;a href="http://msbusiness.com/blog/2013/06/07/greentech-sues-online-watchdog-for-libel/"&gt;http://msbusiness.com/blog/2013/06/07/greentech-sues-online-watchdog-for-libel/&lt;/a&gt;&lt;img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/MlrcLegalActionsAgainstBloggers/~4/YRxZtx18qms" height="1" width="1"/&gt;</content><link rel="replies" type="application/atom+xml" href="http://mlrcblogsuits.blogspot.com/feeds/7707374429586927965/comments/default" title="Post Comments" /><link rel="replies" type="text/html" href="http://www.blogger.com/comment.g?blogID=5643940815118766227&amp;postID=7707374429586927965" title="0 Comments" /><link rel="edit" type="application/atom+xml" href="http://www.blogger.com/feeds/5643940815118766227/posts/default/7707374429586927965?v=2" /><link rel="self" type="application/atom+xml" href="http://www.blogger.com/feeds/5643940815118766227/posts/default/7707374429586927965?v=2" /><link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/MlrcLegalActionsAgainstBloggers/~3/YRxZtx18qms/green-ech-v-watchdogorg.html" title="Green Tech v. Watchdog.org" /><author><name>MLRC</name><uri>http://www.blogger.com/profile/08620652660533505193</uri><email>noreply@blogger.com</email><gd:image rel="http://schemas.google.com/g/2005#thumbnail" width="16" height="16" src="http://img2.blogblog.com/img/b16-rounded.gif" /></author><thr:total>0</thr:total><feedburner:origLink>http://mlrcblogsuits.blogspot.com/2013/06/green-ech-v-watchdogorg.html</feedburner:origLink></entry><entry gd:etag="W/&quot;D08ERXk6cCp7ImA9WhFTEko.&quot;"><id>tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5643940815118766227.post-8543199364977247787</id><published>2013-06-03T12:10:00.000-04:00</published><updated>2013-06-03T12:10:04.718-04:00</updated><app:edited xmlns:app="http://www.w3.org/2007/app">2013-06-03T12:10:04.718-04:00</app:edited><category scheme="http://www.blogger.com/atom/ns#" term="online; website" /><category scheme="http://www.blogger.com/atom/ns#" term="Blog comments" /><category scheme="http://www.blogger.com/atom/ns#" term="Defamation" /><category scheme="http://www.blogger.com/atom/ns#" term="Florida" /><category scheme="http://www.blogger.com/atom/ns#" term="commenter" /><title>DueAll Construction v. Smith et al.</title><content type="html">DueAll Construction v. Smith, et. al&amp;nbsp;(May 16, 2013)
&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
STATUS:
Complaint filed in Florida Circuit Court. &lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Fla.Cir.: Brandenton Residents Sued by Contractor for Defamation&lt;br /&gt;
WFLA.com&lt;br /&gt;
Homeowners in Bradenton's crumbling&amp;nbsp;Willowbrook condominium are in a 
fierce battle with their builder KB Home. That fight has landed two 
residents in a lawsuit.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;a href="http://www.wfla.com/story/22440836/willobrook"&gt;http://www.wfla.com/story/22440836/willobrook&lt;/a&gt;&lt;img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/MlrcLegalActionsAgainstBloggers/~4/798icM-nM_Q" height="1" width="1"/&gt;</content><link rel="replies" type="application/atom+xml" href="http://mlrcblogsuits.blogspot.com/feeds/8543199364977247787/comments/default" title="Post Comments" /><link rel="replies" type="text/html" href="http://www.blogger.com/comment.g?blogID=5643940815118766227&amp;postID=8543199364977247787" title="0 Comments" /><link rel="edit" type="application/atom+xml" href="http://www.blogger.com/feeds/5643940815118766227/posts/default/8543199364977247787?v=2" /><link rel="self" type="application/atom+xml" href="http://www.blogger.com/feeds/5643940815118766227/posts/default/8543199364977247787?v=2" /><link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/MlrcLegalActionsAgainstBloggers/~3/798icM-nM_Q/dueall-construction-v-smith-et-al.html" title="DueAll Construction v. Smith et al." /><author><name>MLRC</name><uri>http://www.blogger.com/profile/08620652660533505193</uri><email>noreply@blogger.com</email><gd:image rel="http://schemas.google.com/g/2005#thumbnail" width="16" height="16" src="http://img2.blogblog.com/img/b16-rounded.gif" /></author><thr:total>0</thr:total><feedburner:origLink>http://mlrcblogsuits.blogspot.com/2013/06/dueall-construction-v-smith-et-al.html</feedburner:origLink></entry><entry gd:etag="W/&quot;D0UBSHkzeSp7ImA9WhFTEko.&quot;"><id>tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5643940815118766227.post-4682094046327769550</id><published>2013-06-03T12:00:00.003-04:00</published><updated>2013-06-03T12:00:59.781-04:00</updated><app:edited xmlns:app="http://www.w3.org/2007/app">2013-06-03T12:00:59.781-04:00</app:edited><category scheme="http://www.blogger.com/atom/ns#" term="online; website" /><category scheme="http://www.blogger.com/atom/ns#" term="tort; derivative liability" /><category scheme="http://www.blogger.com/atom/ns#" term="defamation;" /><title>Schon v. Kozan</title><content type="html">Schon v. Kozan &amp;nbsp;(March 18, 2013)&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;

STATUS: Complaint filed in Minnesota District Court.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Minn.Dist.Ct.
Defamation Doesn't Mean Name Calling&lt;br /&gt;
CBS Philly&lt;br /&gt;
If defamation is like name calling, can you defame someone if you never actually mention his name?&lt;br /&gt;

&lt;a href="http://philadelphia.cbslocal.com/2013/05/31/defamation-doesnt-mean-name-calling/"&gt;http://philadelphia.cbslocal.com/2013/05/31/defamation-doesnt-mean-name-calling/&lt;/a&gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/MlrcLegalActionsAgainstBloggers/~4/QflB636EkME" height="1" width="1"/&gt;</content><link rel="replies" type="application/atom+xml" href="http://mlrcblogsuits.blogspot.com/feeds/4682094046327769550/comments/default" title="Post Comments" /><link rel="replies" type="text/html" href="http://www.blogger.com/comment.g?blogID=5643940815118766227&amp;postID=4682094046327769550" title="0 Comments" /><link rel="edit" type="application/atom+xml" href="http://www.blogger.com/feeds/5643940815118766227/posts/default/4682094046327769550?v=2" /><link rel="self" type="application/atom+xml" href="http://www.blogger.com/feeds/5643940815118766227/posts/default/4682094046327769550?v=2" /><link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/MlrcLegalActionsAgainstBloggers/~3/QflB636EkME/schon-v-kozan.html" title="Schon v. Kozan" /><author><name>MLRC</name><uri>http://www.blogger.com/profile/08620652660533505193</uri><email>noreply@blogger.com</email><gd:image rel="http://schemas.google.com/g/2005#thumbnail" width="16" height="16" src="http://img2.blogblog.com/img/b16-rounded.gif" /></author><thr:total>0</thr:total><feedburner:origLink>http://mlrcblogsuits.blogspot.com/2013/06/schon-v-kozan.html</feedburner:origLink></entry><entry gd:etag="W/&quot;DkUER346fSp7ImA9WhBbFUk.&quot;"><id>tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5643940815118766227.post-1887089170612205640</id><published>2013-05-14T11:10:00.000-04:00</published><updated>2013-05-14T11:10:06.015-04:00</updated><app:edited xmlns:app="http://www.w3.org/2007/app">2013-05-14T11:10:06.015-04:00</app:edited><category scheme="http://www.blogger.com/atom/ns#" term="Internet Service Provider" /><category scheme="http://www.blogger.com/atom/ns#" term="internet" /><category scheme="http://www.blogger.com/atom/ns#" term="Defamation" /><title>Rakofsky v. Washington Post</title><content type="html">Rakofsky v. Washington&amp;nbsp;Post&amp;nbsp;(April 29, 2013)
&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
STATUS:

Opinion delivered on April 29, 2013.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
N.Y. Sup.: Judge Not Impressed by Rakofsky v. the Internet; Dismisses Defamation Claims&lt;br /&gt;
Techdirt&lt;br /&gt;
In a ruling on Friday, the Supreme Court of the State of NY basically shot down every singe on of Rakofsky's claims and granted the motions to dismiss of various defendants.&amp;nbsp; The court very carefully details the factual background and then explains why the motions to dismiss are being granted. &lt;br /&gt;
&lt;a href="https://www.techdirt.com/articles/20130510/17292223040/judge-not-impressed-rakofsky-v-internet-dismisses-defamation-claims.shtml"&gt;https://www.techdirt.com/articles/20130510/17292223040/judge-not-impressed-rakofsky-v-internet-dismisses-defamation-claims.shtml&lt;/a&gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;span style="font-size: x-small;"&gt;&lt;span style="font-family: Arial;"&gt;&amp;gt;&amp;gt;Opinion:&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/span&gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;a href="https://www.documentcloud.org/documents/699478-rakofsky-order.html"&gt;https://www.documentcloud.org/documents/699478-rakofsky-order.html&lt;/a&gt;&lt;img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/MlrcLegalActionsAgainstBloggers/~4/Unn2LFRG2xY" height="1" width="1"/&gt;</content><link rel="replies" type="application/atom+xml" href="http://mlrcblogsuits.blogspot.com/feeds/1887089170612205640/comments/default" title="Post Comments" /><link rel="replies" type="text/html" href="http://www.blogger.com/comment.g?blogID=5643940815118766227&amp;postID=1887089170612205640" title="0 Comments" /><link rel="edit" type="application/atom+xml" href="http://www.blogger.com/feeds/5643940815118766227/posts/default/1887089170612205640?v=2" /><link rel="self" type="application/atom+xml" href="http://www.blogger.com/feeds/5643940815118766227/posts/default/1887089170612205640?v=2" /><link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/MlrcLegalActionsAgainstBloggers/~3/Unn2LFRG2xY/rakofsky-v-washington-post.html" title="Rakofsky v. Washington Post" /><author><name>MLRC</name><uri>http://www.blogger.com/profile/08620652660533505193</uri><email>noreply@blogger.com</email><gd:image rel="http://schemas.google.com/g/2005#thumbnail" width="16" height="16" src="http://img2.blogblog.com/img/b16-rounded.gif" /></author><thr:total>0</thr:total><feedburner:origLink>http://mlrcblogsuits.blogspot.com/2013/05/rakofsky-v-washington-post.html</feedburner:origLink></entry><entry gd:etag="W/&quot;AkYARXg8eyp7ImA9WhBbFEg.&quot;"><id>tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5643940815118766227.post-5159171521949642900</id><published>2013-05-13T11:15:00.003-04:00</published><updated>2013-05-13T11:15:44.673-04:00</updated><app:edited xmlns:app="http://www.w3.org/2007/app">2013-05-13T11:15:44.673-04:00</app:edited><category scheme="http://www.blogger.com/atom/ns#" term="online; website" /><category scheme="http://www.blogger.com/atom/ns#" term="Defamation" /><title>Arrington v. Allen</title><content type="html">Arrington&amp;nbsp;v. Allen&amp;nbsp;(May 5, 2013)
&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
STATUS:

Lawsuit brought on May 5, 2013. &lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
W.D.Wash.: Michael Arrington Files Suit Against Jen Allen, Alleging Defamation&lt;br /&gt;
BetaBeat&lt;br /&gt;
"As a proximate result of the statements alleged above, plaintiff has 
suffered loss of his reputation, shame, mortification, and hurt 
feelings, all to his general damage."&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;a href="http://betabeat.com/2013/05/michael-arrington-files-suit-against-jenn-allen-alleging-defamation/"&gt;http://betabeat.com/2013/05/michael-arrington-files-suit-against-jenn-allen-alleging-defamation/&lt;/a&gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;gt;&amp;gt;Complaint:&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;a href="http://www.scribd.com/doc/140241091/Arrington"&gt;http://www.scribd.com/doc/140241091/Arrington&lt;/a&gt;&lt;img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/MlrcLegalActionsAgainstBloggers/~4/oz12vOAWagU" height="1" width="1"/&gt;</content><link rel="replies" type="application/atom+xml" href="http://mlrcblogsuits.blogspot.com/feeds/5159171521949642900/comments/default" title="Post Comments" /><link rel="replies" type="text/html" href="http://www.blogger.com/comment.g?blogID=5643940815118766227&amp;postID=5159171521949642900" title="0 Comments" /><link rel="edit" type="application/atom+xml" href="http://www.blogger.com/feeds/5643940815118766227/posts/default/5159171521949642900?v=2" /><link rel="self" type="application/atom+xml" href="http://www.blogger.com/feeds/5643940815118766227/posts/default/5159171521949642900?v=2" /><link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/MlrcLegalActionsAgainstBloggers/~3/oz12vOAWagU/arrington-v-allen.html" title="Arrington v. Allen" /><author><name>MLRC</name><uri>http://www.blogger.com/profile/08620652660533505193</uri><email>noreply@blogger.com</email><gd:image rel="http://schemas.google.com/g/2005#thumbnail" width="16" height="16" src="http://img2.blogblog.com/img/b16-rounded.gif" /></author><thr:total>0</thr:total><feedburner:origLink>http://mlrcblogsuits.blogspot.com/2013/05/arrington-v-allen.html</feedburner:origLink></entry><entry gd:etag="W/&quot;DUANRXc9eCp7ImA9WhBbFEg.&quot;"><id>tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5643940815118766227.post-2824868073040683420</id><published>2013-05-13T11:09:00.002-04:00</published><updated>2013-05-13T11:09:54.960-04:00</updated><app:edited xmlns:app="http://www.w3.org/2007/app">2013-05-13T11:09:54.960-04:00</app:edited><category scheme="http://www.blogger.com/atom/ns#" term="online; website" /><category scheme="http://www.blogger.com/atom/ns#" term="Defamation" /><title>Duc Tan v. Le</title><content type="html">Duc Tan v. Le (May 9, 2013)&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;

STATUS: Washington Supreme Court reversed Court of Appeals ruling. &lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Wash. Supreme Court Reinstates $310K Jury Award for Man Defamed as a Communist&lt;br /&gt;
Associated Press&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;a href="http://www.therepublic.com/view/story/a7deebe9badc450a957858b147f8e0db/WA--SCOW-Communist-Defamation"&gt;http://www.therepublic.com/view/story/a7deebe9badc450a957858b147f8e0db/WA--SCOW-Communist-Defamation&lt;/a&gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;h1 class="article_headline"&gt;
&lt;span itemprop="headline"&gt;&lt;/span&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/h1&gt;
&lt;img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/MlrcLegalActionsAgainstBloggers/~4/muWisE6c7gs" height="1" width="1"/&gt;</content><link rel="replies" type="application/atom+xml" href="http://mlrcblogsuits.blogspot.com/feeds/2824868073040683420/comments/default" title="Post Comments" /><link rel="replies" type="text/html" href="http://www.blogger.com/comment.g?blogID=5643940815118766227&amp;postID=2824868073040683420" title="0 Comments" /><link rel="edit" type="application/atom+xml" href="http://www.blogger.com/feeds/5643940815118766227/posts/default/2824868073040683420?v=2" /><link rel="self" type="application/atom+xml" href="http://www.blogger.com/feeds/5643940815118766227/posts/default/2824868073040683420?v=2" /><link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/MlrcLegalActionsAgainstBloggers/~3/muWisE6c7gs/duc-tan-v-le.html" title="Duc Tan v. Le" /><author><name>MLRC</name><uri>http://www.blogger.com/profile/08620652660533505193</uri><email>noreply@blogger.com</email><gd:image rel="http://schemas.google.com/g/2005#thumbnail" width="16" height="16" src="http://img2.blogblog.com/img/b16-rounded.gif" /></author><thr:total>0</thr:total><feedburner:origLink>http://mlrcblogsuits.blogspot.com/2013/05/duc-tan-v-le.html</feedburner:origLink></entry><entry gd:etag="W/&quot;CUIFR3kyeCp7ImA9WhBUFE8.&quot;"><id>tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5643940815118766227.post-7002349232517110570</id><published>2013-05-01T11:51:00.003-04:00</published><updated>2013-05-01T11:51:56.790-04:00</updated><app:edited xmlns:app="http://www.w3.org/2007/app">2013-05-01T11:51:56.790-04:00</app:edited><category scheme="http://www.blogger.com/atom/ns#" term="online; website" /><category scheme="http://www.blogger.com/atom/ns#" term="Anti-SLAPP" /><category scheme="http://www.blogger.com/atom/ns#" term="Defamation" /><title>Med Express v. Nicholls</title><content type="html">Med Express v. Nicholls&amp;nbsp;(March 25, 2013)
&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
STATUS:

Judge set date for an oral hearing on a preliminary injunction.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Med Express Sues Marginally Dissatisfied Customer for Posting Accurate Feedback on Ebay&lt;br /&gt;
TechDirt&lt;br /&gt;
Here's yet another example of companies using lawsuits to censor speech 
-- a situation that would be stopped if there was a serious federal 
anti-SLAPP law in place.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;a href="https://www.techdirt.com/articles/20130416/02180522721/med-express-sues-marginally-dissatisfied-customer-posting-accurate-feedback-ebay.shtml"&gt;https://www.techdirt.com/articles/20130416/02180522721/med-express-sues-marginally-dissatisfied-customer-posting-accurate-feedback-ebay.shtml&lt;/a&gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Complaint:&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;a href="https://www.citizen.org/documents/ComplaintandTROMotion.pdf"&gt;https://www.citizen.org/documents/ComplaintandTROMotion.pdf&lt;/a&gt;&lt;img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/MlrcLegalActionsAgainstBloggers/~4/BWzL6c7f9KM" height="1" width="1"/&gt;</content><link rel="replies" type="application/atom+xml" href="http://mlrcblogsuits.blogspot.com/feeds/7002349232517110570/comments/default" title="Post Comments" /><link rel="replies" type="text/html" href="http://www.blogger.com/comment.g?blogID=5643940815118766227&amp;postID=7002349232517110570" title="0 Comments" /><link rel="edit" type="application/atom+xml" href="http://www.blogger.com/feeds/5643940815118766227/posts/default/7002349232517110570?v=2" /><link rel="self" type="application/atom+xml" href="http://www.blogger.com/feeds/5643940815118766227/posts/default/7002349232517110570?v=2" /><link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/MlrcLegalActionsAgainstBloggers/~3/BWzL6c7f9KM/med-express-v-nicholls.html" title="Med Express v. Nicholls" /><author><name>MLRC</name><uri>http://www.blogger.com/profile/08620652660533505193</uri><email>noreply@blogger.com</email><gd:image rel="http://schemas.google.com/g/2005#thumbnail" width="16" height="16" src="http://img2.blogblog.com/img/b16-rounded.gif" /></author><thr:total>0</thr:total><feedburner:origLink>http://mlrcblogsuits.blogspot.com/2013/05/med-express-v-nicholls.html</feedburner:origLink></entry><entry gd:etag="W/&quot;CUcASH4zfSp7ImA9WhBUFE8.&quot;"><id>tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5643940815118766227.post-8425303295228163002</id><published>2013-05-01T11:44:00.000-04:00</published><updated>2013-05-01T11:44:09.085-04:00</updated><app:edited xmlns:app="http://www.w3.org/2007/app">2013-05-01T11:44:09.085-04:00</app:edited><category scheme="http://www.blogger.com/atom/ns#" term="internet; blogger" /><category scheme="http://www.blogger.com/atom/ns#" term="Slander" /><category scheme="http://www.blogger.com/atom/ns#" term="Libel" /><category scheme="http://www.blogger.com/atom/ns#" term="Defamation" /><title>Fiddler's Creek Foundation v. Schutt</title><content type="html">Fiddler's Creek Foundation v. Schutt&amp;nbsp;(January 25, 2013)
&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
STATUS:

Suit brought in Florida Circuit&amp;nbsp; Court on January 25, 2013.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Fiddler's Creek Suits Become Latest in Libel, Slander Cases Involving Libel&lt;br /&gt;
Naples News&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;a href="http://www.naplesnews.com/news/2013/apr/08/fiddlers-creek-suit-libel-slander-blog-schutt-hoa/"&gt;http://www.naplesnews.com/news/2013/apr/08/fiddlers-creek-suit-libel-slander-blog-schutt-hoa/&lt;/a&gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Complaint: &lt;br /&gt;
&lt;a href="http://media.naplesnews.com/media/static/FIddlersCreekVSchutt.pdf"&gt;http://media.naplesnews.com/media/static/FIddlersCreekVSchutt.pdf&lt;/a&gt;&lt;img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/MlrcLegalActionsAgainstBloggers/~4/1HXCSEiOz2o" height="1" width="1"/&gt;</content><link rel="replies" type="application/atom+xml" href="http://mlrcblogsuits.blogspot.com/feeds/8425303295228163002/comments/default" title="Post Comments" /><link rel="replies" type="text/html" href="http://www.blogger.com/comment.g?blogID=5643940815118766227&amp;postID=8425303295228163002" title="0 Comments" /><link rel="edit" type="application/atom+xml" href="http://www.blogger.com/feeds/5643940815118766227/posts/default/8425303295228163002?v=2" /><link rel="self" type="application/atom+xml" href="http://www.blogger.com/feeds/5643940815118766227/posts/default/8425303295228163002?v=2" /><link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/MlrcLegalActionsAgainstBloggers/~3/1HXCSEiOz2o/fiddlers-creek-foundation-v-schutt.html" title="Fiddler's Creek Foundation v. Schutt" /><author><name>MLRC</name><uri>http://www.blogger.com/profile/08620652660533505193</uri><email>noreply@blogger.com</email><gd:image rel="http://schemas.google.com/g/2005#thumbnail" width="16" height="16" src="http://img2.blogblog.com/img/b16-rounded.gif" /></author><thr:total>0</thr:total><feedburner:origLink>http://mlrcblogsuits.blogspot.com/2013/05/fiddlers-creek-foundation-v-schutt.html</feedburner:origLink></entry><entry gd:etag="W/&quot;C0YESXY9fip7ImA9WhBVGE4.&quot;"><id>tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5643940815118766227.post-7980387917008777312</id><published>2013-04-24T15:18:00.001-04:00</published><updated>2013-04-24T15:18:28.866-04:00</updated><app:edited xmlns:app="http://www.w3.org/2007/app">2013-04-24T15:18:28.866-04:00</app:edited><category scheme="http://www.blogger.com/atom/ns#" term="online; website" /><category scheme="http://www.blogger.com/atom/ns#" term="Copyright" /><category scheme="http://www.blogger.com/atom/ns#" term="Review Site" /><title> Lee v. Makhenivich</title><content type="html">&lt;div class="MsoNormal"&gt;
STATUS: Order given March 27, 2013. &lt;/div&gt;
&lt;div class="MsoNormal"&gt;
&amp;nbsp;&lt;/div&gt;
&lt;div class="MsoNormal"&gt;
S.D.N.Y.: You Shouldn't Need a Copyright Lawyer to Pick a Dentist&lt;o:p&gt;&lt;/o:p&gt;&lt;/div&gt;
&lt;div class="MsoNormal"&gt;
Technology &amp;amp; Marketing Law Blog (Eric Goldman)&lt;o:p&gt;&lt;/o:p&gt;&lt;/div&gt;
&lt;div class="MsoNormal"&gt;
Lee
 became unsatisfied with his interactions with the dentist and posted 
critical online reviews to Yelp, DoctorBase and other websites.&amp;nbsp; 
Apparently unhappy with the reviews, the dentist invoked the Mutual 
Agreement to Maintain Privacy and claimed copyright ownership over those
 reviews.&lt;o:p&gt;&lt;/o:p&gt;&lt;/div&gt;
&lt;div class="MsoNormal"&gt;
&lt;a href="http://blog.ericgoldman.org/archives/2013/04/you_shouldnt_ne.htm"&gt;http://blog.ericgoldman.org/archives/2013/04/you_shouldnt_ne.htm&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/div&gt;
&lt;div class="MsoNormal"&gt;
&lt;o:p&gt;&lt;/o:p&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/div&gt;
&lt;div class="MsoNormal"&gt;
&amp;gt; Opinion: Lee v. Makhenivich&lt;o:p&gt;&lt;/o:p&gt;&lt;/div&gt;
&lt;div class="MsoNormal"&gt;
http://digitalcommons.law.scu.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1347&amp;amp;context=historical&lt;/div&gt;
&lt;img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/MlrcLegalActionsAgainstBloggers/~4/DUSY9Qr5EoQ" height="1" width="1"/&gt;</content><link rel="replies" type="application/atom+xml" href="http://mlrcblogsuits.blogspot.com/feeds/7980387917008777312/comments/default" title="Post Comments" /><link rel="replies" type="text/html" href="http://www.blogger.com/comment.g?blogID=5643940815118766227&amp;postID=7980387917008777312" title="0 Comments" /><link rel="edit" type="application/atom+xml" href="http://www.blogger.com/feeds/5643940815118766227/posts/default/7980387917008777312?v=2" /><link rel="self" type="application/atom+xml" href="http://www.blogger.com/feeds/5643940815118766227/posts/default/7980387917008777312?v=2" /><link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/MlrcLegalActionsAgainstBloggers/~3/DUSY9Qr5EoQ/lee-v-makhenivich.html" title=" Lee v. Makhenivich" /><author><name>MLRC</name><uri>http://www.blogger.com/profile/08620652660533505193</uri><email>noreply@blogger.com</email><gd:image rel="http://schemas.google.com/g/2005#thumbnail" width="16" height="16" src="http://img2.blogblog.com/img/b16-rounded.gif" /></author><thr:total>0</thr:total><feedburner:origLink>http://mlrcblogsuits.blogspot.com/2013/04/lee-v-makhenivich.html</feedburner:origLink></entry><entry gd:etag="W/&quot;CUEBQn47cSp7ImA9WhBWEE0.&quot;"><id>tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5643940815118766227.post-8331309090010942191</id><published>2013-04-03T11:40:00.001-04:00</published><updated>2013-04-03T11:40:53.009-04:00</updated><app:edited xmlns:app="http://www.w3.org/2007/app">2013-04-03T11:40:53.009-04:00</app:edited><category scheme="http://www.blogger.com/atom/ns#" term="Defamation" /><category scheme="http://www.blogger.com/atom/ns#" term="Single Publication Rule" /><category scheme="http://www.blogger.com/atom/ns#" term="4th Circuit; internet" /><title>Johnson v. City of Raleigh</title><content type="html">Johnson v. City of Raleigh (3/29/13)&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
STATUS: Defamation claim dismissed on 3/29/13&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
D.N.C.: Court Applies Single Publication Rule to Dismiss Defamation Claim&lt;br /&gt;
A North Carolina federal court applied the single publication rule in an Internet defamation case in dismissing on statute of limitation grounds long running libel claims against several media defendants who has accused plaintiff of having a statutory rape conviction. It is the first trial or appellate court decision in the Fourth Circuit to squarely apply the single publication rule in dismissing an Internet defamation claim.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Order:&lt;br /&gt;
http://www.medialaw.org/images/medialawdaily/raleigh.pdf&lt;img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/MlrcLegalActionsAgainstBloggers/~4/wZnHNslF3Ec" height="1" width="1"/&gt;</content><link rel="replies" type="application/atom+xml" href="http://mlrcblogsuits.blogspot.com/feeds/8331309090010942191/comments/default" title="Post Comments" /><link rel="replies" type="text/html" href="http://www.blogger.com/comment.g?blogID=5643940815118766227&amp;postID=8331309090010942191" title="0 Comments" /><link rel="edit" type="application/atom+xml" href="http://www.blogger.com/feeds/5643940815118766227/posts/default/8331309090010942191?v=2" /><link rel="self" type="application/atom+xml" href="http://www.blogger.com/feeds/5643940815118766227/posts/default/8331309090010942191?v=2" /><link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/MlrcLegalActionsAgainstBloggers/~3/wZnHNslF3Ec/johnson-v-city-of-raleigh.html" title="Johnson v. City of Raleigh" /><author><name>MLRC</name><uri>http://www.blogger.com/profile/08620652660533505193</uri><email>noreply@blogger.com</email><gd:image rel="http://schemas.google.com/g/2005#thumbnail" width="16" height="16" src="http://img2.blogblog.com/img/b16-rounded.gif" /></author><thr:total>0</thr:total><feedburner:origLink>http://mlrcblogsuits.blogspot.com/2013/04/johnson-v-city-of-raleigh.html</feedburner:origLink></entry><entry gd:etag="W/&quot;D0QFRXk-eCp7ImA9WhBQEUU.&quot;"><id>tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5643940815118766227.post-5309834323555815837</id><published>2013-03-13T10:35:00.001-04:00</published><updated>2013-03-13T10:35:14.750-04:00</updated><app:edited xmlns:app="http://www.w3.org/2007/app">2013-03-13T10:35:14.750-04:00</app:edited><category scheme="http://www.blogger.com/atom/ns#" term="internet; blogger" /><category scheme="http://www.blogger.com/atom/ns#" term="large judgment" /><category scheme="http://www.blogger.com/atom/ns#" term="Defamation" /><title>McGibney v. Moore</title><content type="html">McGibney v. Moore (October 24, 2012)&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
STATUS:&amp;nbsp; Judgement entered against defendant on March 8, 2013.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Nev. Dist.: Revenge Porn Site Founder Loses $250k Defamation Suit&lt;br /&gt;
Ars Technica&lt;br /&gt;
In a decision at the Clark County, Nevada district court, Randazza Legal Group secured a $250,000 judgment against IsAnyoneUp site founder, Hunter Moore.&amp;nbsp; This particular defamation case was not related to Moore's revenge porn activities, but instead focused on statements Moore issued about McGibney.&lt;br /&gt;
http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2013/03/revenge-porn-site-founder-loses-250k-defamation-suit/&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Decision:&lt;br /&gt;
http://bv.1110.cds.contentcolo.net/uploads/files/Executed%20Moore%20Judgement.pdf&lt;img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/MlrcLegalActionsAgainstBloggers/~4/Ah19G9uZ3-8" height="1" width="1"/&gt;</content><link rel="replies" type="application/atom+xml" href="http://mlrcblogsuits.blogspot.com/feeds/5309834323555815837/comments/default" title="Post Comments" /><link rel="replies" type="text/html" href="http://www.blogger.com/comment.g?blogID=5643940815118766227&amp;postID=5309834323555815837" title="0 Comments" /><link rel="edit" type="application/atom+xml" href="http://www.blogger.com/feeds/5643940815118766227/posts/default/5309834323555815837?v=2" /><link rel="self" type="application/atom+xml" href="http://www.blogger.com/feeds/5643940815118766227/posts/default/5309834323555815837?v=2" /><link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/MlrcLegalActionsAgainstBloggers/~3/Ah19G9uZ3-8/mcgibney-v-moore.html" title="McGibney v. Moore" /><author><name>MLRC</name><uri>http://www.blogger.com/profile/08620652660533505193</uri><email>noreply@blogger.com</email><gd:image rel="http://schemas.google.com/g/2005#thumbnail" width="16" height="16" src="http://img2.blogblog.com/img/b16-rounded.gif" /></author><thr:total>0</thr:total><feedburner:origLink>http://mlrcblogsuits.blogspot.com/2013/03/mcgibney-v-moore.html</feedburner:origLink></entry><entry gd:etag="W/&quot;CEUGQ3o9eCp7ImA9WhBSFUs.&quot;"><id>tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5643940815118766227.post-850378410830445318</id><published>2013-02-22T14:43:00.002-05:00</published><updated>2013-02-22T14:43:42.460-05:00</updated><app:edited xmlns:app="http://www.w3.org/2007/app">2013-02-22T14:43:42.460-05:00</app:edited><category scheme="http://www.blogger.com/atom/ns#" term="Anonymous posters" /><category scheme="http://www.blogger.com/atom/ns#" term="website" /><category scheme="http://www.blogger.com/atom/ns#" term="Defamation" /><title>Brompton Buildings v. Yelp</title><content type="html">Brompton Buildings v. Yelp (January 31, 2013)&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Ill.App.: Building Owner Can't Discover the Identity of Tenant Who Writes Bashing Yelp Review&lt;br /&gt;
Forbes (Eric Goldman)&lt;br /&gt;
http://www.forbes.com/sites/ericgoldman/2013/02/20/building-owner-cant-discover-the-identity-of-tenant-who-writes-bashing-yelp-review/&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Opinion:&lt;br /&gt;
http://www.state.il.us/court/R23_Orders/AppellateCourt/2013/1stDistrict/1120547_R23.pdf&lt;img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/MlrcLegalActionsAgainstBloggers/~4/qkTGd1E2U0k" height="1" width="1"/&gt;</content><link rel="replies" type="application/atom+xml" href="http://mlrcblogsuits.blogspot.com/feeds/850378410830445318/comments/default" title="Post Comments" /><link rel="replies" type="text/html" href="http://www.blogger.com/comment.g?blogID=5643940815118766227&amp;postID=850378410830445318" title="0 Comments" /><link rel="edit" type="application/atom+xml" href="http://www.blogger.com/feeds/5643940815118766227/posts/default/850378410830445318?v=2" /><link rel="self" type="application/atom+xml" href="http://www.blogger.com/feeds/5643940815118766227/posts/default/850378410830445318?v=2" /><link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/MlrcLegalActionsAgainstBloggers/~3/qkTGd1E2U0k/brompton-buildings-v-yelp.html" title="Brompton Buildings v. Yelp" /><author><name>MLRC</name><uri>http://www.blogger.com/profile/08620652660533505193</uri><email>noreply@blogger.com</email><gd:image rel="http://schemas.google.com/g/2005#thumbnail" width="16" height="16" src="http://img2.blogblog.com/img/b16-rounded.gif" /></author><thr:total>0</thr:total><feedburner:origLink>http://mlrcblogsuits.blogspot.com/2013/02/brompton-buildings-v-yelp.html</feedburner:origLink></entry><entry gd:etag="W/&quot;CkQMQng-cSp7ImA9WhNaEEg.&quot;"><id>tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5643940815118766227.post-272290787497219959</id><published>2013-01-24T12:59:00.002-05:00</published><updated>2013-01-24T12:59:43.659-05:00</updated><app:edited xmlns:app="http://www.w3.org/2007/app">2013-01-24T12:59:43.659-05:00</app:edited><category scheme="http://www.blogger.com/atom/ns#" term="internet; blogger" /><category scheme="http://www.blogger.com/atom/ns#" term="False Light" /><category scheme="http://www.blogger.com/atom/ns#" term="online; website" /><category scheme="http://www.blogger.com/atom/ns#" term="Google" /><category scheme="http://www.blogger.com/atom/ns#" term="Defamation" /><title>Hingston v. Google</title><content type="html">Hingston v. Google (12/21/12)&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
STATUS: Complaint filed in California District Court on 12/21/12.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
C.D.Cal.: Filing Lawsuits in the United States Over Google Auto-Complete Is...&lt;br /&gt;
Citizen Media Law Blog&lt;br /&gt;
In false light and defamation actions, context is king.&lt;br /&gt;
http://www.citmedialaw.org/blog/2013/filing-lawsuits-united-states-over-google-autocomplete&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Complaint: http://www.citmedialaw.org/sites/citmedialaw.org/files/Hingston%20Complaint.pdf&lt;img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/MlrcLegalActionsAgainstBloggers/~4/HzbZohzqNAM" height="1" width="1"/&gt;</content><link rel="replies" type="application/atom+xml" href="http://mlrcblogsuits.blogspot.com/feeds/272290787497219959/comments/default" title="Post Comments" /><link rel="replies" type="text/html" href="http://www.blogger.com/comment.g?blogID=5643940815118766227&amp;postID=272290787497219959" title="0 Comments" /><link rel="edit" type="application/atom+xml" href="http://www.blogger.com/feeds/5643940815118766227/posts/default/272290787497219959?v=2" /><link rel="self" type="application/atom+xml" href="http://www.blogger.com/feeds/5643940815118766227/posts/default/272290787497219959?v=2" /><link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/MlrcLegalActionsAgainstBloggers/~3/HzbZohzqNAM/hingston-v-google.html" title="Hingston v. Google" /><author><name>MLRC</name><uri>http://www.blogger.com/profile/08620652660533505193</uri><email>noreply@blogger.com</email><gd:image rel="http://schemas.google.com/g/2005#thumbnail" width="16" height="16" src="http://img2.blogblog.com/img/b16-rounded.gif" /></author><thr:total>0</thr:total><feedburner:origLink>http://mlrcblogsuits.blogspot.com/2013/01/hingston-v-google.html</feedburner:origLink></entry><entry gd:etag="W/&quot;Ak8FQXczeyp7ImA9WhNbGUg.&quot;"><id>tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5643940815118766227.post-8413204746000214582</id><published>2013-01-23T11:33:00.001-05:00</published><updated>2013-01-23T11:33:30.983-05:00</updated><app:edited xmlns:app="http://www.w3.org/2007/app">2013-01-23T11:33:30.983-05:00</app:edited><category scheme="http://www.blogger.com/atom/ns#" term="revenge porn" /><category scheme="http://www.blogger.com/atom/ns#" term="online; website" /><category scheme="http://www.blogger.com/atom/ns#" term="pornography" /><category scheme="http://www.blogger.com/atom/ns#" term="Privacy" /><title>Toups et al v. GoDaddy.com et al</title><content type="html">Toups et al v. GoDaddy.com (1/18/13)&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
New Lawsuit Against "Revenge Porn" Site Also Targets GoDaddy&lt;br /&gt;
Ars Technica&lt;br /&gt;
So-called involuntary porn or "revenge porn" websites have continued to make more news- against the will of just about everyone featured on them.&lt;br /&gt;
http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2013/01/new-lawsuit-against-revenge-porn-site-also-targets-godaddy/&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Complaint:&amp;nbsp; http://www.scribd.com/doc/121463764/Class-Action-Suit-Against-GoDaddy-com-Texxxan-com&lt;img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/MlrcLegalActionsAgainstBloggers/~4/dGi8x2T8qtk" height="1" width="1"/&gt;</content><link rel="replies" type="application/atom+xml" href="http://mlrcblogsuits.blogspot.com/feeds/8413204746000214582/comments/default" title="Post Comments" /><link rel="replies" type="text/html" href="http://www.blogger.com/comment.g?blogID=5643940815118766227&amp;postID=8413204746000214582" title="0 Comments" /><link rel="edit" type="application/atom+xml" href="http://www.blogger.com/feeds/5643940815118766227/posts/default/8413204746000214582?v=2" /><link rel="self" type="application/atom+xml" href="http://www.blogger.com/feeds/5643940815118766227/posts/default/8413204746000214582?v=2" /><link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/MlrcLegalActionsAgainstBloggers/~3/dGi8x2T8qtk/toups-et-al-v-godaddycom-et-al.html" title="Toups et al v. GoDaddy.com et al" /><author><name>MLRC</name><uri>http://www.blogger.com/profile/08620652660533505193</uri><email>noreply@blogger.com</email><gd:image rel="http://schemas.google.com/g/2005#thumbnail" width="16" height="16" src="http://img2.blogblog.com/img/b16-rounded.gif" /></author><thr:total>0</thr:total><feedburner:origLink>http://mlrcblogsuits.blogspot.com/2013/01/toups-et-al-v-godaddycom-et-al.html</feedburner:origLink></entry><entry gd:etag="W/&quot;DUQCSH8yfyp7ImA9WhNbGUg.&quot;"><id>tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5643940815118766227.post-6745169179872713313</id><published>2013-01-23T11:09:00.001-05:00</published><updated>2013-01-23T11:09:29.197-05:00</updated><app:edited xmlns:app="http://www.w3.org/2007/app">2013-01-23T11:09:29.197-05:00</app:edited><category scheme="http://www.blogger.com/atom/ns#" term="internet; blogger" /><category scheme="http://www.blogger.com/atom/ns#" term="online; website" /><category scheme="http://www.blogger.com/atom/ns#" term="Libel" /><category scheme="http://www.blogger.com/atom/ns#" term="Defamation" /><title>Bierman &amp; Weier v. Weier &amp; Author Solutions</title><content type="html">Bierman &amp;amp; Weier v. Weier &amp;amp; Author Solutions (court filed date)&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Iowa Supreme Court: Internet Publishes Protected from Libel Suits&lt;br /&gt;
Des Moine Register&lt;br /&gt;
The Iowa Supreme Court has given protections against libel lawsuits to Internet publishes but have declined to extend them to average citizens, a ruling that media lawyers called significant.&lt;br /&gt;
http://www.desmoinesregister.com/viewart/20130122/NEWS01/301220041/Iowa-Supreme-Court-Internet-publishers-protected-from-libel-suits&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Opinion: http://www.iowacourts.gov/Supreme_Court/Recent_Opinions/20130118/10-1503.pdf&lt;img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/MlrcLegalActionsAgainstBloggers/~4/HkrrXgdsNWo" height="1" width="1"/&gt;</content><link rel="replies" type="application/atom+xml" href="http://mlrcblogsuits.blogspot.com/feeds/6745169179872713313/comments/default" title="Post Comments" /><link rel="replies" type="text/html" href="http://www.blogger.com/comment.g?blogID=5643940815118766227&amp;postID=6745169179872713313" title="0 Comments" /><link rel="edit" type="application/atom+xml" href="http://www.blogger.com/feeds/5643940815118766227/posts/default/6745169179872713313?v=2" /><link rel="self" type="application/atom+xml" href="http://www.blogger.com/feeds/5643940815118766227/posts/default/6745169179872713313?v=2" /><link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/MlrcLegalActionsAgainstBloggers/~3/HkrrXgdsNWo/bierman-weier-v-weier-author-solutions.html" title="Bierman &amp; Weier v. Weier &amp; Author Solutions" /><author><name>MLRC</name><uri>http://www.blogger.com/profile/08620652660533505193</uri><email>noreply@blogger.com</email><gd:image rel="http://schemas.google.com/g/2005#thumbnail" width="16" height="16" src="http://img2.blogblog.com/img/b16-rounded.gif" /></author><thr:total>0</thr:total><feedburner:origLink>http://mlrcblogsuits.blogspot.com/2013/01/bierman-weier-v-weier-author-solutions.html</feedburner:origLink></entry><entry gd:etag="W/&quot;DUUMRn4_eyp7ImA9WhBQFk8.&quot;"><id>tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5643940815118766227.post-6138877704751633216</id><published>2013-01-21T13:01:00.003-05:00</published><updated>2013-03-18T13:21:27.043-04:00</updated><app:edited xmlns:app="http://www.w3.org/2007/app">2013-03-18T13:21:27.043-04:00</app:edited><category scheme="http://www.blogger.com/atom/ns#" term="online; website" /><category scheme="http://www.blogger.com/atom/ns#" term="Libel" /><category scheme="http://www.blogger.com/atom/ns#" term="Defamation" /><title>Gordon v. Mediabistro.com</title><content type="html">UPDATE:&amp;nbsp; Complaint answered on March 6, 2013.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
D.C. Sup.: Were Fishbowl's Wendy Wednesday Posts Just a Joke?&lt;br /&gt;
Washington Post&lt;br /&gt;
http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/erik-wemple/wp/2013/03/12/were-fishbowldcs-wendy-wednesday-posts-just-a-joke/&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Answer to Complaint:&lt;br /&gt;
http://www.washingtonpost.com/r/2010-2019/WashingtonPost/2013/03/12/Editorial-Opinion/Graphics/fishbowldcresponse.pdf&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Gordon v. Mediabistro.com&amp;nbsp; (1/17/2013)&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;nbsp;STATUS: Complaint filed on January 17, 2013.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
D.C. Super.: Media News Site Sued for Libel&lt;br /&gt;
The BLT: Blog of the Legal Times&lt;br /&gt;
Wendy Gordon, a local publicist, claimed that the FishBowl DC launched an "unprovoked, online smear campaign" against her and published false information that hurt her reputation and her business.&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;nbsp;http://legaltimes.typepad.com/blt/2013/01/dc-media-news-website-sued-for-libel.html&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Complaint: http://legaltimes.typepad.com/files/gordon-v-mediabistro-complaint.pdf&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;&lt;img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/MlrcLegalActionsAgainstBloggers/~4/b1NxLrH-vsU" height="1" width="1"/&gt;</content><link rel="replies" type="application/atom+xml" href="http://mlrcblogsuits.blogspot.com/feeds/6138877704751633216/comments/default" title="Post Comments" /><link rel="replies" type="text/html" href="http://www.blogger.com/comment.g?blogID=5643940815118766227&amp;postID=6138877704751633216" title="0 Comments" /><link rel="edit" type="application/atom+xml" href="http://www.blogger.com/feeds/5643940815118766227/posts/default/6138877704751633216?v=2" /><link rel="self" type="application/atom+xml" href="http://www.blogger.com/feeds/5643940815118766227/posts/default/6138877704751633216?v=2" /><link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/MlrcLegalActionsAgainstBloggers/~3/b1NxLrH-vsU/gordon-v-mediabistrocom.html" title="Gordon v. Mediabistro.com" /><author><name>MLRC</name><uri>http://www.blogger.com/profile/08620652660533505193</uri><email>noreply@blogger.com</email><gd:image rel="http://schemas.google.com/g/2005#thumbnail" width="16" height="16" src="http://img2.blogblog.com/img/b16-rounded.gif" /></author><thr:total>0</thr:total><feedburner:origLink>http://mlrcblogsuits.blogspot.com/2013/01/gordon-v-mediabistrocom.html</feedburner:origLink></entry><entry gd:etag="W/&quot;CEMMRXk4fCp7ImA9WhNWGU4.&quot;"><id>tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5643940815118766227.post-383802448584212152</id><published>2012-12-19T10:54:00.001-05:00</published><updated>2012-12-19T10:54:44.734-05:00</updated><app:edited xmlns:app="http://www.w3.org/2007/app">2012-12-19T10:54:44.734-05:00</app:edited><category scheme="http://www.blogger.com/atom/ns#" term="internet; blogger" /><category scheme="http://www.blogger.com/atom/ns#" term="online; website" /><category scheme="http://www.blogger.com/atom/ns#" term="Blog comments" /><category scheme="http://www.blogger.com/atom/ns#" term="Defamation" /><category scheme="http://www.blogger.com/atom/ns#" term="Appeal" /><title>Chevaldina v. R.K./ FI Management, Inc.</title><content type="html">Chevaldina v. R.K./FI Management, Inc., No.3612-3189 &amp;nbsp;(12/14/12)
&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
STATUS:
 Blogger appealing preliminary injunction. &lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Fla.App.: Blogger Appeals Preliminary Injunction in Libel Case&lt;br /&gt;
The defendant wrote critical blog posts about a shopping center owner and its leasing practices and was sued for defamation and related claims.&amp;nbsp; In November a circuit court judge enjoined the defendant from writing "defamatory" blogs in the future. &lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Appellate Brief: Chevaldina v. R.K./ FI Management, Inc.&lt;br /&gt;
http://www.medialaw.org/images/medialawdaily/chevaldina.pdf&lt;img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/MlrcLegalActionsAgainstBloggers/~4/hb3h9bofZdo" height="1" width="1"/&gt;</content><link rel="replies" type="application/atom+xml" href="http://mlrcblogsuits.blogspot.com/feeds/383802448584212152/comments/default" title="Post Comments" /><link rel="replies" type="text/html" href="http://www.blogger.com/comment.g?blogID=5643940815118766227&amp;postID=383802448584212152" title="0 Comments" /><link rel="edit" type="application/atom+xml" href="http://www.blogger.com/feeds/5643940815118766227/posts/default/383802448584212152?v=2" /><link rel="self" type="application/atom+xml" href="http://www.blogger.com/feeds/5643940815118766227/posts/default/383802448584212152?v=2" /><link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/MlrcLegalActionsAgainstBloggers/~3/hb3h9bofZdo/chevaldina-v-rk-fi-management-inc.html" title="Chevaldina v. R.K./ FI Management, Inc." /><author><name>MLRC</name><uri>http://www.blogger.com/profile/08620652660533505193</uri><email>noreply@blogger.com</email><gd:image rel="http://schemas.google.com/g/2005#thumbnail" width="16" height="16" src="http://img2.blogblog.com/img/b16-rounded.gif" /></author><thr:total>0</thr:total><feedburner:origLink>http://mlrcblogsuits.blogspot.com/2012/12/chevaldina-v-rk-fi-management-inc.html</feedburner:origLink></entry><entry gd:etag="W/&quot;CEYGQno7fSp7ImA9WhNWGU4.&quot;"><id>tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5643940815118766227.post-7435044234632078043</id><published>2012-12-19T10:48:00.002-05:00</published><updated>2012-12-19T10:48:43.405-05:00</updated><app:edited xmlns:app="http://www.w3.org/2007/app">2012-12-19T10:48:43.405-05:00</app:edited><category scheme="http://www.blogger.com/atom/ns#" term="de" /><title>Noriega v. Huffington Post</title><content type="html">Noriega v. Huffington Post, No. &lt;span style="font-family: Times New Roman;"&gt;1:12-cv-2006 ( 12/14/12)&lt;/span&gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
STATUS:
Complaint filed on 12/14/12.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
D.D.C.: Huffington Post Facing $3Million Libel Lawsuit from Panama Lawyer&lt;br /&gt;
Legal Times&lt;br /&gt;
On August 2nd, an article called "The Primacy of the Rule of Law" was posted on the Huffington Post.&amp;nbsp; The problem, according to a defamation lawsuit, is that the author listed claims he had nothing to do with the piece.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;a href="http://legaltimes.typepad.com/blt/2012/12/the-huffington-post-facing-3m-libel-lawsuit-from-panama-lawyer.html"&gt;http://legaltimes.typepad.com/blt/2012/12/the-huffington-post-facing-3m-libel-lawsuit-from-panama-lawyer.html&lt;/a&gt; &lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Complaint: Noreiga v. Huffington Post&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;a href="http://legaltimes.typepad.com/files/noriega-complaint-1.pdf"&gt;http://legaltimes.typepad.com/files/noriega-complaint-1.pdf&lt;/a&gt;&lt;img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/MlrcLegalActionsAgainstBloggers/~4/ORrg_GEsxQ0" height="1" width="1"/&gt;</content><link rel="replies" type="application/atom+xml" href="http://mlrcblogsuits.blogspot.com/feeds/7435044234632078043/comments/default" title="Post Comments" /><link rel="replies" type="text/html" href="http://www.blogger.com/comment.g?blogID=5643940815118766227&amp;postID=7435044234632078043" title="0 Comments" /><link rel="edit" type="application/atom+xml" href="http://www.blogger.com/feeds/5643940815118766227/posts/default/7435044234632078043?v=2" /><link rel="self" type="application/atom+xml" href="http://www.blogger.com/feeds/5643940815118766227/posts/default/7435044234632078043?v=2" /><link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/MlrcLegalActionsAgainstBloggers/~3/ORrg_GEsxQ0/noriega-v-huffington-post.html" title="Noriega v. Huffington Post" /><author><name>MLRC</name><uri>http://www.blogger.com/profile/08620652660533505193</uri><email>noreply@blogger.com</email><gd:image rel="http://schemas.google.com/g/2005#thumbnail" width="16" height="16" src="http://img2.blogblog.com/img/b16-rounded.gif" /></author><thr:total>0</thr:total><feedburner:origLink>http://mlrcblogsuits.blogspot.com/2012/12/noriega-v-huffington-post.html</feedburner:origLink></entry><entry gd:etag="W/&quot;C0ANRHcycCp7ImA9WhNWGU4.&quot;"><id>tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5643940815118766227.post-337981674418490287</id><published>2012-12-19T10:43:00.000-05:00</published><updated>2012-12-19T10:43:15.998-05:00</updated><app:edited xmlns:app="http://www.w3.org/2007/app">2012-12-19T10:43:15.998-05:00</app:edited><category scheme="http://www.blogger.com/atom/ns#" term="online; website" /><category scheme="http://www.blogger.com/atom/ns#" term="Blog comments" /><category scheme="http://www.blogger.com/atom/ns#" term="Defamation" /><title>LeBlanc v. Skinner</title><content type="html">LeBlanc v. Skinner&amp;nbsp;No. 8310/08 (12/12/2012)
&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
STATUS:
Appellate Court rules in favor of defendant. &lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
N.Y.App.: Calling Someone a Terrorist Online is Non-Actionable Opinion&lt;br /&gt;
Technology &amp;amp; Marketing Law Blog (Eric Goldman)&lt;br /&gt;
Here the court- without reservation- says the online reference doesn't have the obvious serious implications that normally attach to being a "terrorist".&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;a href="http://blog.ericgoldman.org/archives/2012/12/calling_someone.htm"&gt;http://blog.ericgoldman.org/archives/2012/12/calling_someone.htm&lt;/a&gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Order: LeBlanc v. Skinner&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;a href="http://www.nycourts.gov/reporter/3dseries/2012/2012_08494.htm"&gt;http://www.nycourts.gov/reporter/3dseries/2012/2012_08494.htm&lt;/a&gt;&lt;img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/MlrcLegalActionsAgainstBloggers/~4/-HQtJpNWeBQ" height="1" width="1"/&gt;</content><link rel="replies" type="application/atom+xml" href="http://mlrcblogsuits.blogspot.com/feeds/337981674418490287/comments/default" title="Post Comments" /><link rel="replies" type="text/html" href="http://www.blogger.com/comment.g?blogID=5643940815118766227&amp;postID=337981674418490287" title="0 Comments" /><link rel="edit" type="application/atom+xml" href="http://www.blogger.com/feeds/5643940815118766227/posts/default/337981674418490287?v=2" /><link rel="self" type="application/atom+xml" href="http://www.blogger.com/feeds/5643940815118766227/posts/default/337981674418490287?v=2" /><link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/MlrcLegalActionsAgainstBloggers/~3/-HQtJpNWeBQ/leblanc-v-skinner.html" title="LeBlanc v. Skinner" /><author><name>MLRC</name><uri>http://www.blogger.com/profile/08620652660533505193</uri><email>noreply@blogger.com</email><gd:image rel="http://schemas.google.com/g/2005#thumbnail" width="16" height="16" src="http://img2.blogblog.com/img/b16-rounded.gif" /></author><thr:total>0</thr:total><feedburner:origLink>http://mlrcblogsuits.blogspot.com/2012/12/leblanc-v-skinner.html</feedburner:origLink></entry><entry gd:etag="W/&quot;AkIAQnk-fSp7ImA9WhNXGEQ.&quot;"><id>tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5643940815118766227.post-750627972650519540</id><published>2012-12-07T11:42:00.000-05:00</published><updated>2012-12-07T11:42:23.755-05:00</updated><app:edited xmlns:app="http://www.w3.org/2007/app">2012-12-07T11:42:23.755-05:00</app:edited><category scheme="http://www.blogger.com/atom/ns#" term="online; website" /><category scheme="http://www.blogger.com/atom/ns#" term="corruption; summary judgment" /><category scheme="http://www.blogger.com/atom/ns#" term="Defamation" /><title>Martin v. Daily News</title><content type="html">Martin v. Daily News, No. 100050/08 (Dec.3, 2012)&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
STATUS: Court grants Defendant's motion for summary judgment.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
N.Y.Sup.: Court Grants Summary Judgment in Favor of the Daily News&lt;br /&gt;
Plaintiff Justice Larry Martin of the Supreme Court of the State of New York sued the paper and the journalist who wrote a series of blog posts and stories about judicial corruption in Brooklyn in 2007.&amp;nbsp; Justice Martin failed to show actual malice and the court granted the defendant's motion for summary judgment and dismissed the claims.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Opinion: Martin v. Daily News&lt;br /&gt;
http://www.medialaw.org/images/medialawdaily/martin.pdf&lt;img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/MlrcLegalActionsAgainstBloggers/~4/-zvJqI2G3zQ" height="1" width="1"/&gt;</content><link rel="replies" type="application/atom+xml" href="http://mlrcblogsuits.blogspot.com/feeds/750627972650519540/comments/default" title="Post Comments" /><link rel="replies" type="text/html" href="http://www.blogger.com/comment.g?blogID=5643940815118766227&amp;postID=750627972650519540" title="0 Comments" /><link rel="edit" type="application/atom+xml" href="http://www.blogger.com/feeds/5643940815118766227/posts/default/750627972650519540?v=2" /><link rel="self" type="application/atom+xml" href="http://www.blogger.com/feeds/5643940815118766227/posts/default/750627972650519540?v=2" /><link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/MlrcLegalActionsAgainstBloggers/~3/-zvJqI2G3zQ/martin-v-daily-news.html" title="Martin v. Daily News" /><author><name>MLRC</name><uri>http://www.blogger.com/profile/08620652660533505193</uri><email>noreply@blogger.com</email><gd:image rel="http://schemas.google.com/g/2005#thumbnail" width="16" height="16" src="http://img2.blogblog.com/img/b16-rounded.gif" /></author><thr:total>0</thr:total><feedburner:origLink>http://mlrcblogsuits.blogspot.com/2012/12/martin-v-daily-news.html</feedburner:origLink></entry><entry gd:etag="W/&quot;DU4NRHs7eyp7ImA9WhNUE0w.&quot;"><id>tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5643940815118766227.post-84883537344918170</id><published>2012-12-07T11:29:00.002-05:00</published><updated>2013-01-04T11:46:35.503-05:00</updated><app:edited xmlns:app="http://www.w3.org/2007/app">2013-01-04T11:46:35.503-05:00</app:edited><category scheme="http://www.blogger.com/atom/ns#" term="Injunction / Restraining Order" /><category scheme="http://www.blogger.com/atom/ns#" term="online; website" /><category scheme="http://www.blogger.com/atom/ns#" term="Defamation" /><title>Dietz Development v. Perez</title><content type="html">&lt;b&gt;UPDATE&lt;/b&gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
STATUS: Virginia Supreme Court overturns preliminary injunction.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;b&gt; &lt;/b&gt;&lt;br /&gt;
Va: Injunction Over Negative Yelp Review Overturned by Virginia Supreme Court&lt;br /&gt;
Washington Post&lt;br /&gt;
The Virginia Supreme Court has overturned a preliminary injunction against a Fairfax woman who is facing a $750,000 defamation suit for her negative reviews on Yelp and Angie's List.&lt;br /&gt;
http://www.washingtonpost.com/local/crime/injunction-over-negative-yelp-review-overturned-by-virginia-supreme-court/2013/01/02/c83046aa-552d-11e2-8b9e-dd8773594efc_story.html?wprss=rss_crime&amp;nbsp;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Order: Perez v. Dietz Development&lt;br /&gt;
http://www.citizen.org/documents/SupremeCourtReversal.pdf &lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;nbsp;Dietz Development v. Perez (Oct. 31, 2012)&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
STATUS: Judge ruled in favor of Plaintiff in preliminary injunction.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Vir.Cir.: Judge Says Homeowner Must Delete Certain Accusations on Yelp, Angie's List&lt;br /&gt;
Washington Post&lt;br /&gt;
A Fairfax County woman being sued for defamation over negative reviews she wrote on Yelp and Angie's List must delete certain accusations and is barred from repeating them in new posts.&lt;br /&gt;
http://www.washingtonpost.com/local/crime/judge-says-homeowner-must-delete-some-accusations-on-yelp-angies-list/2012/12/05/bd97448a-3f22-11e2-a2d9-822f58ac9fd5_story.html?wprss=rss_local&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Memo in Support of Preliminary Injunction:&lt;br /&gt;
http://apps.washingtonpost.com/g/documents/local/plaintiffs-memo/162/&lt;img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/MlrcLegalActionsAgainstBloggers/~4/Cwo2VyR138U" height="1" width="1"/&gt;</content><link rel="replies" type="application/atom+xml" href="http://mlrcblogsuits.blogspot.com/feeds/84883537344918170/comments/default" title="Post Comments" /><link rel="replies" type="text/html" href="http://www.blogger.com/comment.g?blogID=5643940815118766227&amp;postID=84883537344918170" title="0 Comments" /><link rel="edit" type="application/atom+xml" href="http://www.blogger.com/feeds/5643940815118766227/posts/default/84883537344918170?v=2" /><link rel="self" type="application/atom+xml" href="http://www.blogger.com/feeds/5643940815118766227/posts/default/84883537344918170?v=2" /><link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/MlrcLegalActionsAgainstBloggers/~3/Cwo2VyR138U/dietz-development-v-perez.html" title="Dietz Development v. Perez" /><author><name>MLRC</name><uri>http://www.blogger.com/profile/08620652660533505193</uri><email>noreply@blogger.com</email><gd:image rel="http://schemas.google.com/g/2005#thumbnail" width="16" height="16" src="http://img2.blogblog.com/img/b16-rounded.gif" /></author><thr:total>0</thr:total><feedburner:origLink>http://mlrcblogsuits.blogspot.com/2012/12/dietz-development-v-perez.html</feedburner:origLink></entry><entry gd:etag="W/&quot;C0QCRXY6eSp7ImA9WhFSFEU.&quot;"><id>tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5643940815118766227.post-3697677167822771609</id><published>2012-11-29T10:13:00.002-05:00</published><updated>2013-06-17T11:02:44.811-04:00</updated><app:edited xmlns:app="http://www.w3.org/2007/app">2013-06-17T11:02:44.811-04:00</app:edited><category scheme="http://www.blogger.com/atom/ns#" term="online; website" /><category scheme="http://www.blogger.com/atom/ns#" term="Statute of Limitations" /><category scheme="http://www.blogger.com/atom/ns#" term="Defamation" /><title>Shepard v. The Huffington Post</title><content type="html">&lt;strong&gt;UPDATE&lt;/strong&gt;:&amp;nbsp; A federal appeals court holds that there was no libel. &lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
8th.Cir.: HuffPo Smearing of Candidate Not Libel, Says Court&lt;br /&gt;
Lawyers.com&lt;br /&gt;
A federal appeals court upheld the dismissal of a lawsuit accusing the Huffington Post of libeling a former U.S. Senate candidate from Minnesota by calling him an arsonist in a story headline.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;a href="http://blogs.lawyers.com/2013/06/huffpo-smearing-of-senate-candidate-not-libel-court-says/"&gt;http://blogs.lawyers.com/2013/06/huffpo-smearing-of-senate-candidate-not-libel-court-says/&lt;/a&gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Opinion:&lt;br /&gt;
http://media.ca8.uscourts.gov/opndir/13/06/124036U.pdf&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Shepard v.&amp;nbsp;The Huffington Post&amp;nbsp;(June 2012)
&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
STATUS:
District Court dismissed the claims with prejudice after finding that it was barred by the statute of limitations. &lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
D.Minn.: HuffPo Cleared for IDing Candidate as Arsonist&lt;br /&gt;
Courthouse News&lt;br /&gt;
A former Congressional candidate waited too long to sue the Huffington Post over an article that labels him an "arsonist", a federal judge.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Order: Shepard v. The Huffington Post&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;nbsp;&lt;a href="https://www.courthousenews.com/2012/11/27/huffpo.pdf"&gt;https://www.courthousenews.com/2012/11/27/huffpo.pdf&lt;/a&gt;&lt;img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/MlrcLegalActionsAgainstBloggers/~4/p1j7BzM-gFI" height="1" width="1"/&gt;</content><link rel="replies" type="application/atom+xml" href="http://mlrcblogsuits.blogspot.com/feeds/3697677167822771609/comments/default" title="Post Comments" /><link rel="replies" type="text/html" href="http://www.blogger.com/comment.g?blogID=5643940815118766227&amp;postID=3697677167822771609" title="0 Comments" /><link rel="edit" type="application/atom+xml" href="http://www.blogger.com/feeds/5643940815118766227/posts/default/3697677167822771609?v=2" /><link rel="self" type="application/atom+xml" href="http://www.blogger.com/feeds/5643940815118766227/posts/default/3697677167822771609?v=2" /><link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/MlrcLegalActionsAgainstBloggers/~3/p1j7BzM-gFI/shepard-v-huffington-post.html" title="Shepard v. The Huffington Post" /><author><name>MLRC</name><uri>http://www.blogger.com/profile/08620652660533505193</uri><email>noreply@blogger.com</email><gd:image rel="http://schemas.google.com/g/2005#thumbnail" width="16" height="16" src="http://img2.blogblog.com/img/b16-rounded.gif" /></author><thr:total>0</thr:total><feedburner:origLink>http://mlrcblogsuits.blogspot.com/2012/11/shepard-v-huffington-post.html</feedburner:origLink></entry><entry gd:etag="W/&quot;CEcCQns4fCp7ImA9WhNQGUk.&quot;"><id>tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5643940815118766227.post-7061820572252593254</id><published>2012-11-26T10:01:00.000-05:00</published><updated>2012-11-26T10:01:03.534-05:00</updated><app:edited xmlns:app="http://www.w3.org/2007/app">2012-11-26T10:01:03.534-05:00</app:edited><category scheme="http://www.blogger.com/atom/ns#" term="Settlements" /><category scheme="http://www.blogger.com/atom/ns#" term="NBA" /><category scheme="http://www.blogger.com/atom/ns#" term="AP" /><category scheme="http://www.blogger.com/atom/ns#" term="Twitter" /><category scheme="http://www.blogger.com/atom/ns#" term="Defamation" /><title>Spooner v. The Associated Press</title><content type="html">Spooner v. The Associated Press&lt;br /&gt;
STATUS: Lawsuit settled in December 2012.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
NBA Ref &amp;amp; AP Settle Suit Over Reporter's Tweet&lt;br /&gt;
Minneapolis St. Paul Business Journal&lt;br /&gt;
http://www.bizjournals.com/twincities/blog/law/2011/12/nba-ref-ap-reporter-settle-over-tweet.html?page=all&lt;img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/MlrcLegalActionsAgainstBloggers/~4/fkwN1lHFqdM" height="1" width="1"/&gt;</content><link rel="replies" type="application/atom+xml" href="http://mlrcblogsuits.blogspot.com/feeds/7061820572252593254/comments/default" title="Post Comments" /><link rel="replies" type="text/html" href="http://www.blogger.com/comment.g?blogID=5643940815118766227&amp;postID=7061820572252593254" title="0 Comments" /><link rel="edit" type="application/atom+xml" href="http://www.blogger.com/feeds/5643940815118766227/posts/default/7061820572252593254?v=2" /><link rel="self" type="application/atom+xml" href="http://www.blogger.com/feeds/5643940815118766227/posts/default/7061820572252593254?v=2" /><link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/MlrcLegalActionsAgainstBloggers/~3/fkwN1lHFqdM/spooner-v-associated-press.html" title="Spooner v. The Associated Press" /><author><name>MLRC</name><uri>http://www.blogger.com/profile/08620652660533505193</uri><email>noreply@blogger.com</email><gd:image rel="http://schemas.google.com/g/2005#thumbnail" width="16" height="16" src="http://img2.blogblog.com/img/b16-rounded.gif" /></author><thr:total>0</thr:total><feedburner:origLink>http://mlrcblogsuits.blogspot.com/2012/11/spooner-v-associated-press.html</feedburner:origLink></entry><entry gd:etag="W/&quot;C08AQnk4cCp7ImA9WhJaF0w.&quot;"><id>tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5643940815118766227.post-4584530427816456213</id><published>2012-10-08T11:57:00.001-04:00</published><updated>2012-10-08T11:57:23.738-04:00</updated><app:edited xmlns:app="http://www.w3.org/2007/app">2012-10-08T11:57:23.738-04:00</app:edited><category scheme="http://www.blogger.com/atom/ns#" term="NY" /><category scheme="http://www.blogger.com/atom/ns#" term="online; website" /><category scheme="http://www.blogger.com/atom/ns#" term="Libel" /><title>Gilman v. Spitzer</title><content type="html">Gilman v. Spitzer&amp;nbsp;(10/1/12)&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;

STATUS:
Lawsuit dismissed on 10/5/12.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
S.D.N.Y.:&amp;nbsp; Federal Judge Dismisses Lawsuit Against Ex-Gov Spitzer&lt;br /&gt;
New York Times&lt;br /&gt;
A federal judge on Friday dismissed a libel lawsuit against ex-Gov. Spitzer and the online magazine Slate for a column Spitzer wrote in 2010 about an insurance bid-rigging scandal. &lt;br /&gt;
&lt;a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2012/09/29/nyregion/federal-judge-dismisses-libel-lawsuit-against-ex-gov-spitzer.html?ref=politics&amp;amp;_r=0"&gt;https://www.nytimes.com/2012/09/29/nyregion/federal-judge-dismisses-libel-lawsuit-against-ex-gov-spitzer.html?ref=politics&amp;amp;_r=0&lt;/a&gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Opinion: Gilman v. Spitzer&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;a href="http://ia600709.us.archive.org/5/items/gov.uscourts.nysd.383728/gov.uscourts.nysd.383728.38.0.pdf"&gt;http://ia600709.us.archive.org/5/items/gov.uscourts.nysd.383728/gov.uscourts.nysd.383728.38.0.pdf&lt;/a&gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/MlrcLegalActionsAgainstBloggers/~4/2L7WXjRqCRs" height="1" width="1"/&gt;</content><link rel="replies" type="application/atom+xml" href="http://mlrcblogsuits.blogspot.com/feeds/4584530427816456213/comments/default" title="Post Comments" /><link rel="replies" type="text/html" href="http://www.blogger.com/comment.g?blogID=5643940815118766227&amp;postID=4584530427816456213" title="0 Comments" /><link rel="edit" type="application/atom+xml" href="http://www.blogger.com/feeds/5643940815118766227/posts/default/4584530427816456213?v=2" /><link rel="self" type="application/atom+xml" href="http://www.blogger.com/feeds/5643940815118766227/posts/default/4584530427816456213?v=2" /><link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/MlrcLegalActionsAgainstBloggers/~3/2L7WXjRqCRs/gilman-v-spitzer.html" title="Gilman v. Spitzer" /><author><name>MLRC</name><uri>http://www.blogger.com/profile/08620652660533505193</uri><email>noreply@blogger.com</email><gd:image rel="http://schemas.google.com/g/2005#thumbnail" width="16" height="16" src="http://img2.blogblog.com/img/b16-rounded.gif" /></author><thr:total>0</thr:total><feedburner:origLink>http://mlrcblogsuits.blogspot.com/2012/10/gilman-v-spitzer.html</feedburner:origLink></entry><entry gd:etag="W/&quot;CUQMRng7eyp7ImA9WhJaEUQ.&quot;"><id>tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5643940815118766227.post-403742140060911813</id><published>2012-10-02T11:56:00.001-04:00</published><updated>2012-10-02T11:56:27.603-04:00</updated><app:edited xmlns:app="http://www.w3.org/2007/app">2012-10-02T11:56:27.603-04:00</app:edited><category scheme="http://www.blogger.com/atom/ns#" term="internet; blogger" /><category scheme="http://www.blogger.com/atom/ns#" term="content regulation" /><category scheme="http://www.blogger.com/atom/ns#" term="Defamation" /><title>ZAGG v. Catanach</title><content type="html">Zagg v. Catanach ( 9/27/12)&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
E.D.Pa.:&amp;nbsp; Business School Professors May Be Liable for Defamatory Blog Posts&lt;br /&gt;
Technology &amp;amp; Marketing Law Blog (Eric Goldman)&lt;br /&gt;
The lawsuit involves a blog post "Don't Gag on Zagg".&amp;nbsp; They appear to have removed the post, but it was widely distributed and discussed. &lt;br /&gt;
&lt;a href="http://blog.ericgoldman.org/archives/2012/09/business_school.htm"&gt;http://blog.ericgoldman.org/archives/2012/09/business_school.htm&lt;/a&gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Memorandum: &lt;a href="http://www.paed.uscourts.gov/documents/opinions/12d0938p.pdf"&gt;http://www.paed.uscourts.gov/documents/opinions/12d0938p.pdf&lt;/a&gt;&lt;img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/MlrcLegalActionsAgainstBloggers/~4/3NhBKHGeibc" height="1" width="1"/&gt;</content><link rel="replies" type="application/atom+xml" href="http://mlrcblogsuits.blogspot.com/feeds/403742140060911813/comments/default" title="Post Comments" /><link rel="replies" type="text/html" href="http://www.blogger.com/comment.g?blogID=5643940815118766227&amp;postID=403742140060911813" title="0 Comments" /><link rel="edit" type="application/atom+xml" href="http://www.blogger.com/feeds/5643940815118766227/posts/default/403742140060911813?v=2" /><link rel="self" type="application/atom+xml" href="http://www.blogger.com/feeds/5643940815118766227/posts/default/403742140060911813?v=2" /><link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/MlrcLegalActionsAgainstBloggers/~3/3NhBKHGeibc/zagg-v-catanach.html" title="ZAGG v. Catanach" /><author><name>MLRC</name><uri>http://www.blogger.com/profile/08620652660533505193</uri><email>noreply@blogger.com</email><gd:image rel="http://schemas.google.com/g/2005#thumbnail" width="16" height="16" src="http://img2.blogblog.com/img/b16-rounded.gif" /></author><thr:total>0</thr:total><feedburner:origLink>http://mlrcblogsuits.blogspot.com/2012/10/zagg-v-catanach.html</feedburner:origLink></entry></feed>
