High court rules trade secret law unconstitutional: judge's order using law to restrain publication voided
Article Abstract:
The Oregon Supreme Court ruled in Oregon ex rel. Sports Management News, Inc. v. Nachtigal that a state trade secret law that restricted printing or writing about an alleged trade secret was an unconstitutional prior restraint. The Court found that a trial court order enforcing this provision was also an unconstitutional prior restraint. The plaintiff's newsletter, Sporting Goods Intelligence, had reported on design changes planned for shoes sold by Adidas America. The Court found that publication of lawfully obtained information by the newsletter could not be restricted by statute.
Publication Name: News Media & the Law
Subject: Literature/writing
ISSN: 0149-0737
Year: 1996
User Contributions:
Comment about this article or add new information about this topic:
Texas high court strikes down gag orders
Article Abstract:
The Texas Supreme Court has ruled in two cases that gag orders preventing parties and attorneys from speaking to the press will almost always be unconstitutional in the state. In Davenport v Garcia, the court ruled that the Texas constitutional guarantee of free speech is broader than the US Constitution and, therefore, gag orders are presumed to be unconstitutional unless extraordinary circumstances can be shown. In Star-Telegram v Walker, the court allowed a rape victim's name to be published, since her name had already become public, citing Davenport as precedent.
Publication Name: News Media & the Law
Subject: Literature/writing
ISSN: 0149-0737
Year: 1992
User Contributions:
Comment about this article or add new information about this topic:
State high court upholds prior restraint on videotaped talks
Article Abstract:
The South Carolina Supreme Court ruling stated the media could not publicly distribute information from a videotape that recorded a confidential conversation between an attorney and an accused murderer. The Court held prior restraint outweighed a news agency's right to disseminate information. The Court also held the trial court had a right to authority over its proceedings. The (Columbia) State newspaper argued it had a right to print information because it was not a party to proceedings.
Publication Name: News Media & the Law
Subject: Literature/writing
ISSN: 0149-0737
Year: 1998
User Contributions:
Comment about this article or add new information about this topic:
- Abstracts: Concluding statements. Trapped between damnations: the true meaning of the population crisis. Population, the demographic transition, and "biological imperatives."
- Abstracts: Bucking trend, court finds drivers' records act constitutional. Without hearing, high court overturns decision on openness of British letter
- Abstracts: Court releases names in prostitution probe. Interest in exposing FBI misconduct justifies release of records. Records on state employees' unused sick leave are public
- Abstracts: Court upholds contempt order against NBC. Going, going, gone? Two networks, AP photographer forced to turn over tape, film
- Abstracts: The Senate's silly season. News photographers assaulted, harassed, arrested by police. Access to places: a guide for reporters & photographers gathering news