Mediaboss Marketing

Education Week (subscription) (blog)

More High School Students Support First Amendment Freedoms ... Education Week (subscription) (blog) The John S. and James L. Knight Foundation's sixth annual study on the topic finds a growing share of students support First Amendment rights. and more »

Read more from the original source:
More High School Students Support First Amendment Freedoms ... - Education Week (subscription) (blog)

Mauro Grigollo Westend61/Newscom"Today is Jim Stewart's birthday. Reply to post a wish on his Timeline or reply with 1 to post 'Happy Birthday!'" That's the text, from Facebook to Colin Brickman, that launched a legal battle between Brickman and the social-media giant.

You see, Brickman had opted out of receiving texts from Facebook via the platform's notification settings. In response to the unwanted birthday reminder, Brickman filed a class-action lawsuit against Facebook, representing "all individuals who received one or more Birthday Announcement Texts from [Facebook] to a cell phone through the use of an automated telephone dialing system at any time without their consent."

The suit, filed in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California, argues that Facebook's sending unauthorized text messages is a violation of the federal Telephone Communications Privacy Act (TCPA). "A valid TCPA claim requires plaintiff to allege (1) a defendant called a cellular telephone number; (2) using an automated telephone dialing system ('ATDS'); and (3) without the recipient's prior express consent," explains lawyer Jack Greiner in the Cincinnati Enquirer. "A text message is a 'call' within the meaning of the TCPA."

In its defense, Facebook alleged that the TCPA in unconstitutional. Citing the U.S. Supreme Court's 2015 decision in Reed v. Town of Gilbert, Facebook attorneys argued that the TCPA's allowed exceptionsfor emergency communications and debt collectorsrender it an umpermissable, content-based restriction on speech. But the judge, while agreeing that the TCPA's restrictions are content-based (and thus subject to strict scrutiny, legally speaking), found that the law passed constitutional muster nonetheless.

The case will go forward with Facebook defending its text messages on technical grounds; it argues that the texts were not automated because Brickman and others who received them had supplied Facebook with their phone numbers. But, for now, Facebook's argument that it has a First Amendment right to send people text messages against their will has been rejected.

The 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals has twice found the TCPA to be constitutional in previous casesMoser v. Federal Communications Commission (1995) and Campbell-Ewald v. Gomez (2016)the Department of Justice pointed out in a memorandum in support of TCPA's constitutionality. In the latter case, the 9th Circuit rejected the idea that the government's interest with the law "only extends to the protection of residential privacy, and that therefore the statute is not narrowly tailored to the extent that it applies to cellular text messages."

"There is no evidence that the government's interest in privacy ends at home," ruled the 9th circuit in Campbell-Ewald. Furthermore, "to whatever extent the government's significant interest lies exclusively in residential privacy, the nature of cell phones renders the restriction of unsolicited text messaging all the more necessary to ensure that privacy."

Go here to read the rest:
Facebook Has No First Amendment Right to Send Unauthorized Texts, Says Court - Reason (blog)

News Release Norwich University Feb. 10, 2017

Contact: Daphne Larkin 802-485-2886 dlarkin@norwich.edu Follow us on Twitter @NorwichNews

NORTHFIELD, Vt. Norwich Universitys Sullivan Museum and History Center will host a lunch and learn program on the First Amendment in conjunction with a national, pop-up exhibit commemorating the 225th anniversary of the Bill of Rights.

On Wednesday, Feb. 22, at noon, The Sullivan Museum and History Center presents, A Living Document: The First Amendment, Past, Present and Future, a talk by Austin Gray, attorney and longtime professor of civil liberties and Constitutional law. The event includes a light lunch and is free and open to the public.

Gray, of law firm Gray Law PLLC in Barre, Vt., has been teaching at the university level for 20 years and is one of the founding faculty of the Master of Law program at Champlain College. He also teaches Civil Liberties and Constitutional Law at Norwich University. A graduate of Temple University School of Law, Gray is a member of the Vermont, Pennsylvania and New Jersey Bar Associations.

This presentation is held in conjunction with a new pop-up exhibition from the National Archives, The Bill of Rights and You, commemorating the 225th anniversary of the ratification of this landmark document. This exhibit spotlights one of the most remarkable periods in American history, explores the origins of the first 10 amendments to the U.S. Constitution (collectively known as the Bill of Rights), illustrates how each amendment protects U.S. citizens, and looks at how Americans exercise the rights outlined in the amendments. The Bill of Rights and You invites visitors to connect directly with the people, places, and events that mark this historic documents evolution. The exhibit will be on display in the Museums Rotunda through March 15, 2017.

The Bill of Rights and You co-curator Jennifer Johnson states: The Bill of Rights represents the Founders vision that it would be the people, through votes, that could change the Constitution with enough consensus. And when the people desired a Bill of Rights, our first 10 amendments were added to our governing charter.

Visitors are also encouraged to engage in a dialogue by answering the question: What Does Freedom Mean to You? A message board in the Museum Rotunda is available to post your own personal answer.

The Bill of Rights and You is organized by the National Archives and Records Administration, and traveled by the National Archives Traveling Exhibits Service (NATES). This exhibition was developed in collaboration with the National Archives National Outreach Initiative to commemorate the 225th Anniversary of the Bill of Rights. The exhibition is presented in part by AT&T, Seedlings Foundation, and the National Archives Foundation.

This exhibit is brought to you in collaboration with the Vermont Humanities Council and the Federation of State Humanities Councils. A statewide nonprofit organization founded in 1974, the Vermont Humanities Council strives to make Vermont a state in which every individual reads, participates in public affairs, and continues to learn throughout life.

Norwich Universitys Sullivan Museum and History Center is the only museum in Vermont to be named a Smithsonian Affiliate. Currently, there are two exhibitions focusing on the year leading up the 100th Anniversary of World War One and the 75th Anniversary of World War Two. These exhibits are on display through May 2017 and include various items from the university collection as well as borrowed materials. Some of the artifacts on exhibit include: trench art, World War One and Two posters, patriotic jewelry, artwork, uniforms, medals, objects from the field, weapons and other items from our collection.

The museum is open to the public from 8 until 4 Monday through Friday, but is closed on holidays. Admission is free. For more information about the programs or exhibit, please call 802-485-2183 or visit http://academics.norwich.edu/museum.

Go here to see the original:
Norwich University Hosts Program on First Amendment, National ... - vtdigger.org

The Channels Opinion Pages | STAFF COLUMN

Madeline Nathaus, Channels Staff February 10, 2017 122 views Filed under Columns, National, Opinion, Politics, Protest

The First Amendment was included in the Constitution by the founding fathers to guarantee citizens of the United States freedom of the press, religion, assembly and petition. It is this amendment that separates America from more than 40 percent of the worlds population.

Along with this right to freedom of speech comes the right to peacefully protest, march, and to publicly state ones beliefs in hopes of bringing attention to an issue or cause.

Protests and marches have been a vital part of forming modern day America and upholding democracy. Without citizens rising up against the government African Americans would not have civil rights, women would not be able to vote, and gay couples would not be able to get married.

Though most protests and marches remain relatively peaceful, there are times when they take a violent turn and end up disproving the point they are trying to make. For example, in the days following Trumps election, protests broke out among major cities and college campuses across the country. Unfortunately, protests in Los Angeles, Denver and especially Portland became violent in some form.

It is because of the First Amendment and the rights it provides that the Ku Klux Klan can legally march through the streets spreading a message of hate towards non-white citizens. It is why the Westboro Baptist Church can stand on corners chanting God hates fags all in the name of freedom of speech.

However, contrary to these organizations messages of discrimination and unacceptance, the Black Lives Matter movement spreads a message of lawful fairness towards African Americans.

The Womens March, which took place a couple weeks ago, brought attention to the constant sexism that women still face in the 21st century.

There is a reason why Gandhi and Martin Luther King Jr. advocated for peaceful protests. Imagine a mother yelling at her daughter for neglecting to wash the dishes, the daughter is less inclined to listen to her mothers reasoning if she is being aggressive.

Violent protesters ruin the movement for peaceful and lawful protesters. Peaceful and disruptive protests are the most effective forms of defiance. Vandalism, destruction of property, physically attacking other civilians, setting fires and other violent acts are illegal and indecent.

As long as protesters dont break any laws, police officers are more than happy to defend the rights of citizens. They are not the bad guys. After all, it is their job to prevent unlawful activities.

I respect everyones constitutional rights, as long as [the protests] are peaceful. Thats all that we can ask for, said Paul Espinosa, an officer with the Los Angeles Police Department.

Love sends a stronger message than hate. People will be more open to listening to a message that contradicts their own ideology if their personal beliefs are tolerated and their rights and properties are respected.

Protests and marches are the most effective form of displaying civilians disagreement with certain government choices, but they must be used as a tool, not a weapon. Do not abuse your rights.

Excerpt from:
The Channels : Keep protests peaceful; don't weaponize First ... - The Channels

Siding with Google, a federal judge has dismissed a lawsuit brought by search engine optimization company e-ventures Worldwide, which claimed its sites were wrongly removed from search results.

U.S. District Court Judge Paul Magnuson in the Middle District of Florida said in a ruling issued this week that Google has a free speech right to decide which search results to display.

"Googles actions in formulating rankings for its search engine and in determining whether certain websites are contrary to Googles guidelines and thereby subject to removal are the same as decisions by a newspaper editor regarding which content to publish, which article belongs on the front page, and which article is unworthy of publication," U.S. District Court Judge Paul Magnuson in the Middle District of Florida said in a ruling issued this week. "The First Amendment protects these decisions, whether they are fair or unfair, or motivated by profit or altruism."

The decision grew out of a lawsuit filed by e-ventures in late 2014. The company alleged in its original complaint that Google removed 231 sites associated with e-ventures' Webmaster tools. Google allegedly notified e-ventures that the sites would be de-listed because they were "pure spam."

"Identifying what Google believes is 'pure spam," and remedying the problem to remove the "pure spam" designation, without any specificity from Google, is a potentially insurmountable task," e-ventures wrote in the complaint, which accused Google of engaging in unfair and deceptive practices and interfering with business relations and defamation. e-ventures later dropped the defamation claim and added an allegation that Google violated a law regarding unfair competition.

Magnuson noted in his ruling that e-ventures' consultant told the company its sites were spam.

"In its attempts to secure re-listing of its sites on Google, e-ventures admitted that its sites were littered with doorway domains and scraped content -- e-ventures told Google that its single topseos.com site contained 18,000 scraped articles, 46,000 scraped press releases, and more than 28,000 scraped job listings,"Magnuson added.

He said that Google restored 50 e-ventures sites in November 2014, and that e-Ventures "abandoned" 100 others by consolidating them into a single domain.

Magnuson's ruling comes nine months after he rejected Google's request to dismiss the case at a preliminary stage.

Santa Clara University law professor Eric Goldman, who called attention to Magnuson's decision, suggests e-ventures' lawsuit should have been thrown out earlier.

"Of course Google can de-index sites it thinks are spam," Goldman writes on his blog. "Its hard to believe were still litigating that issue in 2017."

He notes that Google prevailed in prior lawsuits accusing it of wrongly demoting companies in the search results. In 2003, a federal judge dismissed a lawsuit about that issue brought by SearchKing; in 2006, a different judge threw out a similar lawsuit by KinderStart.

Go here to read the rest:
Google Has First Amendment Right To Remove Sites From Search ... - MediaPost Communications