Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2001/12/21
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]No, of course not. But I think the definition of what is the press and the entitlement of heightened protection is pertinent here. Slboodan Dimitrov "John M. Sikes, Jr." wrote: > > Libel has nothing to do with it. > > ---------- > >From: S Dimitrov <sld@earthlink.net> > >To: leica-users@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us > >Subject: Re: [Leica] when is a pj not a pj? > >Date: Sat, Dec 22, 2001, 12:06 AM > > > > > You might want to read this little trifle; > > http://www.wired.com/news/politics/0%2C1283%2C48996%2C00.html > > Speaks volumes. > > Slobodan Dimitrov > > > > "John M. Sikes, Jr." wrote: > >> > >> "Photo journalists" is an approbation given by the trade to itself. There > >> is no civil or criminal statute or principle of law which exempts self > >> styled PJ's from the consequences of their actions. > >> When two persons act in knowing concert, as to outsiders they are equally > >> responsible, as principal and agent in civil law and as co- conspirators in > >> criminal law, regardless what names they give themselves. > >> º > > -- > > To unsubscribe, see http://mejac.palo-alto.ca.us/leica-users/unsub.html > -- > To unsubscribe, see http://mejac.palo-alto.ca.us/leica-users/unsub.html - -- To unsubscribe, see http://mejac.palo-alto.ca.us/leica-users/unsub.html