
| Sun | Mon | Tue | Wed | Thu | Fri | Sat |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 2 | 3 | ||||
| 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 |
| 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | 17 |
| 18 | 19 | 20 | 21 | 22 | 23 | 24 |
| 25 | 26 | 27 | 28 | 29 | 30 |
« Astronomy Breakthrough | Main | Distributed Journalism: A New Effort to Launch »
TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.typepad.com/t/trackback/2175832
Listed below are links to weblogs that reference San Francisco to Regulate Blogging?:
» Too Lazy to Read: Bloggers Freak Over SF Ordinance from Desirable Roasted Coffee
Have you heard the latest meme sweeping the blogosphere? San Francisco Board of Supervisors is considering an ordinance making all bloggers register with the City Ethics Commission? And charge bloggers $1000 if their blog mentions local candidates and ... [Read More]
It comes down to whether blogging is a "recognized news medium", which is not defined, but implies the Board of Supervisors gets to license journalists.
Not good.
Posted by: Kevin Marks | April 03, 2005 at 11:12 PM
Are you sure this wasn't an April Fools' Day joke...
Posted by: Owen | April 04, 2005 at 05:45 AM
As far as I can tell from reading the ordinance, this would regulate people who are paid by candidates to blog. It wouldn't cover people who write independently.
Posted by: Bill Jennings | April 04, 2005 at 08:44 AM
The Federal Election Commission has issued proposed regulations of political activity over the Internet. Comments are due June 3.
http://technoflak.blogspot.com/2005/04/federal-election-commission-moves-to.html
Posted by: Alice Marshall | April 04, 2005 at 10:11 AM
"It comes down to whether blogging is a "recognized news medium", which is not defined, but implies the Board of Supervisors gets to license journalists.
"Not good."
But standard in election law (and other law, for that matter). When there's a public interest in things like disclosure and the bureaucratic hoops that tends to employ, it's common practice to provide a news exemption.
Posted by: The One True b!X | April 04, 2005 at 12:27 PM
I should have added: If you look at the ordinance, it defines certain types of news media and then includes a catchall phase for types it hasn't thought to specifically cite.
That seems like fairly standard practice to me as well, and allows for the evolution of what society considers a news outlet.
I mean, the only alternative would be to not write news outlet exemptions into the law at all, which is the worse idea.
Posted by: The One True b!X | April 04, 2005 at 12:29 PM
Here is some additional background, seems to be a case of hard cases make bad law-
http://www.chrisnolan.com/archives/000738.html#more
Posted by: Alice Marshall | April 04, 2005 at 01:15 PM
"Cat Fight" Now Playing
I recently sent a Press Release to Amy Alkon who writes a syndicated column called "Advice Goddess" and got a diatribe about our company on her website. The statements are false.
Bolow are some of her nasty comments. So I have published an amusing Blog about her at
www.sew-beautiful.us/concreep
Amy...The following statements you made about me and our company, Sew Beautiful, www.sew-beautiful.us on your Blog are libelous and they are false. You have no basis
for making these remarks. Here are Amy’s remarks...
"I especially love your argument that your customers like it. I'm sure the guy who gets a stolen TV really cheaply from a
fence is thrilled as well.
"DOES Chanel really know what you're doing? I doubt it."
"I'm loath to believe anything you say"
"...there's much you're doing that's illegal"
"Your rationalization of it is absolutely disgusting"
"Clearly, you are utterly unconcerned with much but making a profit."
"Your business practices make me retch, and your disrespect for others' creative work and intellectual property is creepy."
"Hey, there were lots of Nazis in WWII. Doesn't make it right to murder Jews, homosexuals, and gypsies. "Everybody's doing it" doesn't make it moral. What's so disturbing is the energy you put into defending your taking the work of others and profiting from it. Knockoff artists sicken me. It's wrong to profit from work that is not yours -- whether or not there's some hole in the fence of the law that permits you to sneak through and do it."
Amy
I am sorry we have had such a negative
correspondence about my site. I am really a good person who wanted to help people who had trouble taking their medications. My sister-in-law has Parkinson's. It all started with our PILL PROOF (www.sew-beautiful.us/yournetstores) kit and just expanded from there. I was in a bad car accident and was unable to work for 10 years from a back injury. My doctor said I should start an
internet business so I would be able to work around my injury. I never thought I would have so many businesses. I am truly blessed and mean no bad will towards you.
Jane Langdon
UPDATE ...
Hollywood Fish Bowl LA has
published a rather funny comment about Amy
having too much time on her hands if she is so relentless about going after crippled, impoverished manual piece-work laborers in Wisconsin college towns!
See link
http://www.mediabistro.com/fishbowlla/
www.sew-beautiful.us/concreep
www.sew-beautiful.us/yournetstores
Complete Text
http://www.advicegoddess.com/goddessblog.html
http://www.advicegoddess.com/mt/mt-comments.cgi?entry_id=1376
Posted by: Jane Langdon | April 05, 2005 at 08:22 PM
http://foothold.top07.com/homepage/ mature rough sex grannysexpics
Posted by: mature girls mpegs | June 02, 2005 at 03:22 AM