pudge's Journal: Justice is Done

A "vlogger" is released from prison after finally turning over evidence that was the object of a subpoena.

The justice done here is not that he was released, but this his jailing forced him to turn over the evidence.

From the article:

Wolf's lawyers had argued that the First Amendment gave him the right to refuse the subpoena to turn over the rest of his tape. ... "The First Amendment, as I read it, was designed precisely to prevent that tragedy," Wolf said in prepared statement he read Tuesday on the steps of San Francisco City Hall.

Maybe he can't actually read, which is why is a "vlogger" and not a "blogger." The First Amendment says nothing about the right to refuse a subpoena, nor does it even imply it. None of the three branches of government have ever, in any way, recognized that right, in our nation's history. You are making things up that are not there. You have an obligation to provide evidence of a crime if ordered to do so, just like everyone else. The First Amendment does not make you special just because you call yourself "press."

You may think the press should have the right, even the Constitutional right, to not reveal sources or evidence. I would say you are entirely wrong, but that is a legitimate argument to make. But to say you do have that right, in our federal judicial system? Utter nonsense.

A weird take on this

[bofkentucky]

Could he have claimed that distribution of his work in the courts violates his copyright on the material?

Re:

[pudge]

Could he have claimed that distribution of his work in the courts violates his copyright on the material?

No, absolutely not. Copyright could prevent someone from taking the video from court records and using it in certain ways, but not from entering it into court records.

Re:

[robi2106]

not even close. the original copy would not need to be copied in order to be presented in court. the MiniDV tape could be write protected (flip the switch) and then played in an MiniDV camera with an RCA video output straight to a TV.

many companies have tried this tactic to avoid presenting something that is supposed to be a trade secret. The government tries this with information it considers top secret. the courts solution is to bar the press so that the court can conduct business with out leaking the