Want to stay current on e–commerce law? Sign up for Email Newsletter.
New Brunswick Court Recognizes Blogging as a Form of Journalism
In the recent decision of Her Majesty the Queen v. Charles Joseph Leblanc, the Provincial Court of New Brunswick was open to recognizing blogging as a legitimate trade, and bloggers as legitimate members of the media.
In June 2006, the Defendant, Charles Joseph Leblanc (“Mr. Leblanc”) attended at the Atlantica Conference being held in St. John, New Brunswick, for the purpose of reporting for his blog on the protests against the meeting of the chamber of commerce and board of trade members from Atlantic Canada and the New England states. While the Defendant was taking pictures with his digital camera, the protesters stormed the conference, at which time the Defendant was arrested for obstructing a police officer. While the Defendant was being handcuffed, the arresting officer removed Mr. Leblanc’s digital camera and proceeded to delete the images of himself from the camera.
The Court, in recognizing the general public’s unfamiliarity with the concepts of blog and blogger, turned its attention to the Google website, which defines blogger as a person who writes weblogs, and a blog as a shorted version of weblog. The Court specifically defined a blog as:
A collaborative space either stand alone or within a website that visitors can post comments, link to, add to, or just read on a weekly, daily, hourly basis. Used extensively on journalism sites for breaking news, etc…
The Court held that without a search warrant, it was illegal for the arresting officer to remove Mr. Leblanc’s digital camera, turn it on and delete some of his pictures. The Court additionally found that the defendant, whom was never advised by the police that he would be arrested if he did certain things, was simply “plying his trade, photographing a demonstration for inclusion in his blog when he was arrested.” Further, the Court found that Mr. Leblanc was taking photographs in an area that was open to the public where members of “the so called main stream media” were also taking photographs and filming without police interference, and that he was “simply plying his trade” along side other reporters, and that the area was attended by at least one masked protestor, “who was not even approached by the police.”
In dismissing the charges for obstruction, the Court found the conflicting evidence before it was difficult and did not meet the threshold to convict the Defendant.
For a copy of the decision, visit:
http://www.canlii.org/nb/cas/nbpc/2006/2006nbpc37.html