It's 2010, and most high school student newspapers aren't accessible online. Even the ones that are often are limited to the static presence of a PDF of the print edition.
Tampa-area Wesley Chapel High School declined last year from a "C" to a "D" in Florida's school performance ratings.
When school authorities insisted they could control what students publish in campus newspapers and yearbooks, the public largely accepted this incursion into the First Amendment with a shrug.
A recent California court ruling reemphasizes the breadth of protection that Web site operators enjoy under the federal Communications Decency Act – even where those aggrieved by the site’s editorial content claim that they are not arguing over content at all.In Doe II v.
The SPLC’s lawyers frequently lecture about the doctrine of “fair use,” and how – properly applied – it can enable journalists to sample lawfully from copyright-protected content.
Federal law has been interpreted as protecting the operators of Web sites from liability for content posted by unrelated third parties – like commenters on Web site bulletin boards – but even that broad grant of immunity has its outer limits.Last week, a federal appeals court ruled that a company offering access to people’s private telephone records could not hide behind the liability shield of the Communications Decency Act (a/k/a Section 230) by claiming to be no more than a conduit for information gathered by third parties.