Saperstein & Crowell, llp 349 5th Ave., NY, NY 10016
(212) 490-7770 Phone
NEWSLETTER
Entertainment/Sports Law May 23, 2013
 
Entertainment/Sports Law
 

Legitimacy of "Screener" Ban to Deter Motion Picture Piracy

"Screeners" are the videotapes and DVD copies of films that are sent to voters in competitions such as the Academy ...(more)

 

Sports Artist Sued Over Painting of Tiger Woods

In 1997, Tiger Woods became the youngest player ever to win the Masters Tournament, setting a 72-hole record for the ...(more)

 

Exceptions to Enforcement of Copyright Law

Copyright protection in the U.S. has existed since the formation of the Constitution, and coverage has continually been expanded to ...(more)

 

The Effective Regulation of Professional Athletes and Their Agents

The ever-increasing commercial popularity of sports has made the effective regulation of professional sports even more prevalent. Specifically, greater media ...(more)

 

Entertainment & Sports Law News Headlines

Eminem's publisher sues Facebook over song usage

U.S. Judge in Oregon Dismisses Movie Pirating Lawsuit

Fired Idaho Head Football Coach Files Lawsuit

Bill Limits California Workers' Comp For Pro Athletes

Soccer Referee Punched by Player Dies

Prohibiting Newsroom Searches Under the Privacy Protection Act of 1980


Reporters generally enjoy protection from being compelled to disclose confidential source information in legal actions under the freedom of the press provision of the First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution. This protection is generally referred to as the reporter's privilege. Some states also provide protection through state "shield laws." In 1980, a federal law called the Privacy Protection Act (the Act) was enacted to provide additional protection by prohibiting newsroom searches by government employees.

The Privacy Protection Act of 1980
In some instances, when a subpoena cannot be issued, as in cases when a court date has not yet been set, government officers or employees have attempted to search reporter newsrooms to seize the information. In such cases, assertion of the reporter's privilege to keep the information confidential would be premature and thus, unavailable.

However, the Act protects a reporter's "work product" or "documentary materials" in their possession from being searched or seized in newsroom searches by government officers and employees, even if the government has a search warrant. "Work product" generally includes materials that were created for communication to the public, such as article drafts and notes. "Documentary materials" refers to items used to formally record information, such as photographs and videotapes.

Congress passed the Act in reaction to a 1978 U.S. Supreme Court case, in which the Court ruled that the government could search a newsroom or a reporter's home with a search warrant if there was reason to believe that evidence of a crime would be found. Like the reporter's privilege, the purpose of the Act's prohibition against newsroom searches is to encourage the free flow of information to the public via the news media, by protecting the confidentiality of a reporter's sources.

Exceptions to the Federal Prohibition on Newsroom Searches
The protections provided by the Act are not absolute. In other words, under certain specified circumstances, searches typically in violation of the act may be permitted. The government may search for or seize a reporter's "work product" or "documentary materials" where the government has probable cause to believe that:

  • The person possessing such materials has committed or is committing the criminal offense to which the materials relate
  • The information is necessary to prevent death or serious injury
  • The issuance of a subpoena would lead to the destruction of "documentary materials" (the materials would likely be destroyed when the members of the newsroom hear about the issuance of the subpoena)
  • The information relates to national security or child pornography
If federal or state law enforcement officials violate the Act, a news organization may sue and could receive damages, possibly including legal fees.

© 2012 NextClient.com, Inc.  All rights reserved.