Comment wrong (Score 4, Informative) 250
"Sony can't (successfully) sue for whatever else you can dream up, because that would be the government enforcing some law restricting the press from doing their job as the press, a clear violation of the first amendment."
No. Proof : press is bound by copyright law too. Press cannot give the full copy of a book in an article and pretend it is covered by first amendment and freedom of press. Freedom of press is not a get-free-out-of-civil-liabilities card.
Bottom line : the first amendement and freedom of press is about not allowing the government to limit and infringe on press. It is not a "get free" card for all laws whatsoever, including copyright, 3rd party liabilities and so forth. If you spread private confidential or copyrighted document, you will get bitten in the ass , and it will be by civil lawsuit.
In fact remember : free speech mean the government cannot stops your speech. It does not protect you of ANY private consequence for that speech. If that would be the case journalist would never be sued for libel.
No. Proof : press is bound by copyright law too. Press cannot give the full copy of a book in an article and pretend it is covered by first amendment and freedom of press. Freedom of press is not a get-free-out-of-civil-liabilities card.
Bottom line : the first amendement and freedom of press is about not allowing the government to limit and infringe on press. It is not a "get free" card for all laws whatsoever, including copyright, 3rd party liabilities and so forth. If you spread private confidential or copyrighted document, you will get bitten in the ass , and it will be by civil lawsuit.
In fact remember : free speech mean the government cannot stops your speech. It does not protect you of ANY private consequence for that speech. If that would be the case journalist would never be sued for libel.