Obsidian Finance Group won its defamation lawsuit against blogger Crystal L. Cox this morning, largely because she was determined not to be a member of the media. Cox runs a variety of investigative blogs, many of which focus on financial issues. Her blog Obsidian Finance Sucks accused the company and executive Kevin Padrick of tax and governmental fraud.
The company had issued a cease and desist letter, which Cox did not comply with, and as a response sued her for defamation. “Yes I am a Self-Proclaimed Investigative Blogger and under Supreme Court Decisions, under the law as making a living as an Investigative Blogger, Gathering News, Taking Interviews, and Reporting on these Stories I am Media [sic],” she has argued. “I am an Independent News Media. I am a Public Forum, my blogs do go out in news feeds and I am Legally Media [sic].”
But Judge Marco Hernandez , who presided over the case, disagrees. He wrote that, among other things, Cox’s lack of “any education in journalism…any credentials or proof of any affiliation with any recognized news entity…” and alleged failure to contact “’the other side’ to get both sides of the story” do not qualify her as a member of the media. Hernandez also noted that journalistic shield laws don’t cover the alleged defamation statements attributed to Cox. She has been ordered to pay Obsidian Finance $2.5 million in damages.
Cox tells us she plans to appeal the decision. She also believes bloggers need to be recognized as journalists to protect them from this type of legal action. “A blogger is a journalist, or reporting in my opinion, when they take interviews, get tips emailed, get and research documents, study cases and depositions, talk to those personally involved, and post their story just as a traditional reporter.” She also adds that bloggers “oftentimes [are] without the limitations of having to please your advertisers, or your local politician or corporate machine.”
[Updated to better reflect timeline of events - 4:03 pm PST]
Bullshit
This is a very interesting case. The law in Oregon regarding shield-law protection states that she should be protected – I believe that other states have granted Bloggers the same protection. However, with that said, the statute in Oregon says that even if a party is determined to be a journalist, it does not apply in a defamation action where the party/journalist asserts the defense that she had a source for the allegedly defamatory statements. I’d really have to read the decision to see what verbiage he used in this case because the judge could have set a (bad) precedent.
Regardless, she did make a mistake by not getting a lawyer and if she goes to appeal the ruling and doesn’t get one well…whoops.
This Quote “After receiving a cease-and-desist letter, Cox refused citing herself as a journalist protected by Anti-Slapp laws. is not true. The cease and desist did not cite a blog, or a post in any way. And I demanded that Anti-Slapp Laws Be my Defense from the Begining. The 2.5 Million Dollar Blog Post was introduced into this case on July 22nd 2011, 6 months after the lawsuit was filed, I did not get due process of 60 days to then use Anti-Slapp, though I demanded to use it. The hearing was one month later and trial was set.
I did not refuse a Cease And Desist, I asked for clarification on any post. They new I was covering this story for years and in fact had deposed one of my sources in video and asked about me, yet they never contacted me and on Dec. 22nd a Cease and Desist with no post to consider retracting. They cannot just demand I drop all blog posts about them, on my Investigative Blogger, Whistleblower Media Blogs, they have to tell me which ones and a legitimate reason why I should consider a retraction.
Lady you have some issues, sorry that you got screwed!
How can you say she has issues? Why is it that one must be properly educated in journalism to be able to write, investigate and gather intelligent or pertinent information regarding any situation? Why must a person specifically be associated with a journalistic entity in order to be recognized for their thoughts, ideas or investigative results? I think this is an unjustified judgement against this person. I don’t know the full details of the case so I won’t comment on whether or not legal process was followed. What I object to here is the repression of information posted by someone which was deemed defamatory because they didn’t have specific education or affiliations. An artist can draw a photograph of someone or some event without these kinds of credentials. Filmmakers do it all the time. And if you follow *any* financial discussion forums on Yahoo, Google or iHub, you will find many people posting “facts” abotu companies that have potential to impact the investing decisions of others. Why do their posts not apply in this context? And what happened to freedom of speech? Does that only apply if I work for a media organization? You don’t have to agree with Crystal on her posts or her investigations. But the repression of her opinions based on her investigations seems highly suspicious to me. Our freedoms are coming to an end and that right soon.
“Why is it that one must be properly educated in journalism to be able to write, investigate and gather intelligent or pertinent information regarding any situation?”
They don’t need to be to gather information or write. They DO need to be in order to be considered a journalist. And she was deemed NOT to be a journalist which is why she lost the case.
I did not get Screwed, in Losing I win for the Greater Good.
If you’re a journalist, I’m the King of France. C’est très magnifique!!!
You opened your big mouth, and without even properly investigating, proceeded to post slander. Your are not a journalist. You are just a loudmouth with a keyboard and domain name pointing to a free blog. Tripod/geocities should be so proud.
You opened your mouth and got a dick shoved in it. If you want to be a journalist, consider going to school and getting the proper credentials.
Just because I can fix my car doesn’t make me a mechanic, just because I can cook doesn’t make me a chef. Just because you have a computer and a keyboard doesn’t mean that you are a journalist. There are credentials and certifications for the above professions for a myriad of excellent reasons.
On the bright side, they probably don’t actually expect you to pay the 2.5 million (unless they just want to make you suffer, in which case, I’m not sure I blame them).
What I wrote was true to the best of what I knew, brought 500 documents of proof and was denied using them, judge said they were hear say.. and I was deceived into not tesitfying.. i investigated and for 3 years.. and i still write on them, linking to proof and public documents.. you know your truth, I know mine and theirs.. this is the smallest story I get daily tips on..
Not once in this story did she defend that what she said on her blog was the truth.Were these people she wrote about violating tax laws ?
Not once in this story did she defend that what she said on her blog was the truth.Were these people she wrote about violating tax laws ?
They Violated Bankruptcy Code, Yes. I brought over 500 documents of Proof and it was thrown out, the research, document links, audios, videos, contracts and more were and are on my blogs to this day. I FULLY believe that Kevin Padrick of Obsidian Finance Group did Violate Bankruptcy Code, and call for a Special Investigation by the Attorney General, as I Claim that the Department of Justice Trustee was involved as well as the Bankruptcy Judge. Dig Deep, I am and always was “the Messenger” , I was and am reporting the story, not making it up.
The same federal courts that decided that actual “journalists” aren’t required to tell the truth? Ineresting… so journalists are allowed to lie, everyone else is NOT. This means that being a journalist means you have no credibility. Newscasters have immunity to prosecution, and therefore cannot be trusted as much as even a crazy homeless guy ranting on the street. Good job, guys.