TRENTON — The state Supreme Court is expected to rule this morning whether a blogger is protected from revealing her sources for what she wrote about a Freehold-based software company on another website. Depending how far the ruling goes, the case involving Washington State resident Shellee Hale could more clearly define whether bloggers receive the same type of protections...
TRENTON — The state Supreme Court is expected to rule this morning whether a blogger is protected from revealing her sources for what she wrote about a Freehold-based software company on another website.
Depending how far the ruling goes, the case involving Washington State resident Shellee Hale could more clearly define whether bloggers receive the same type of protections as "traditional’’ journalists in New Jersey.
Hale, a former Microsoft employee and a private investigator, argues she was preparing an article for her website, Pornafia, on the infiltration of pornography on the Internet when she posted her comments about Too Much Media Inc. in 2008.
In comments she posted to a message board about a security breach by TMM, Hale claimed its owners had threatened her. TMM, which helps online adult entertainment companies track sales, sued for defamation and Hale sought protection of New Jersey so-called shield law from revealing her sources. TMM argued Hale is not a journalist and fabricated the purpose of her website to seek the protection.
A Superior Court judge in Monmouth County ruled in 2009 that the protection did not apply to Hale. An appellate panel later that year upheld that decision.
Previous coverage:
• Today in Trenton: N.J. Supreme Court to hear case of blogger sued for defamation
• Blogger in online porn company lawsuit wants case to go to N.J. Supreme Court
• N.J. appeals court hears arguments over whether blogger is protected by shield laws
• N.J. court rules blogger is not protected under shield law in porn company defamation case