birdwatcher (birdwatcher) wrote,
birdwatcher
birdwatcher

Надо же, как интересно

One of the first lessons that any aspiring journalist learns is that the First Amendment provides a bullet-proof shield against lawsuits when they publish documents that are lawfully obtained. Especially in cases where those documents are a matter of public concern. However, when it comes to documents that were obtained outside of the law, there was still a crime committed. Is the journalist at fault then? It turns out that legally, the onus of the crime falls on the person who leaked the documents, not the newspaper or journalist that publishes them.
Read more at http://www.inquisitr.com/3557923/trumps-leaked-tax-returns-prompt-lawsuit-threats-can-he-legally-sue/#qvETsEBCj2DbRrz0.99

Т.е. если журналисту принесли документы, полученные в нарушение соглашений о конфиденциальности, то он не обязан соблюдать эти чужие соглашения и имеет право такую информацию опубликовать. Как удаётся сочетать этот подход с запретом инсайдерской торговли? Несомненно, правильная цена активов является важнейшим matter of public concern. Чем же публикация сенсации в своей платной газете отличается от информированной покупки или продажи акций?
Tags: преступление
Subscribe

  • Логично. Полная аналогия

    madonna (Verified): There’s a new Vaccination!! Its called GUN CONTROL! Should be mandatory. It will SAVE LIVES! View this…

  • Сработало!

    foxnews -- Retail chain Kroger closed two California stores Saturday after Long Beach City approved a coronavirus "hero pay" ordinance.

  • Defund the police

    McMaken@mises.org -- The Problem with "Just Do What the Cops Say and You Won't Get Hurt" That was certainly the case for Frank Lobato, a bedridden…

  • Post a new comment

    Error

    default userpic
    When you submit the form an invisible reCAPTCHA check will be performed.
    You must follow the Privacy Policy and Google Terms of use.
  • 5 comments