Senators Joe Lieberman (I-CT) and Arlen Specter (R-PA) had an op-ed in yesterday’s Wall Street Journal, announcing their introduction of the Free Speech Protection Act of 2008, the companion to a House bill introduced by Rep. Pete King (R-NY) and co-sponsored by Rep. Anthony Weiner (D-NY).
The bills are aimed at the practice of “libel tourism,” in which plaintiffs choose to file libel suits in jurisdictions thought more likely to give a favorable result. Lieberman and Specter explain:
In 2003, U.S. scholar Rachel Ehrenfeld asserted in her book, “Funding Evil: How Terrorism Is Financed and How to Stop It,” that Saudi banker Khalid Bin Mahfouz helped fund Osama bin Laden. The book was published in the U.S. by a U.S. company. But 23 copies were bought online by English residents, so English courts permitted the Saudi to file a libel suit there.
Ms. Ehrenfeld did not appear in court, so Mr. Bin Mahfouz won a $250,000 default judgment against her. He has filed or threatened to file at least 30 other suits in England.
Fear of a similar lawsuit forced Random House U.K. in 2004 to cancel publication of “House of Bush, House of Saud,” a best seller in the U.S. that was written by an American author. In 2007, the threat of a lawsuit compelled Cambridge University Press to apologize and destroy all available copies of “Alms for Jihad,” a book on terrorism funding by American authors. The publisher even sent letters to libraries demanding that they destroy their copies, though some refused to do so.
PJM’s Roger Kimball is among those who have raised the profile of this issue, both by writing backgrounders and recently hosting a conference addressing it. There are others, to be sure. However, as most of the high-profile cases to date have involved jihad and terrorism, most of the coverage has come from the right section of the blogosphere, with Jeffrey Toobin being an early notable exception. Otherwise, the left side of the media only got concerned when Richard Perle threatened to sue Seymour Hersh over an article he wrote implying that Perle was using his position as a Pentagon adviser to benefit financially from the war to liberate Iraq.  Thus, bipartisanship on this issue in Congress is truly notable. That, and the fact that bipartisanship is usually the case when it comes to restricting speech, as with the issue of campaign finance reform.
(h/t Dan Collins.)
Thus, bipartisanship on this issue in Congress is truly notable.
Surely, the other shoe will drop.
I expect it will come in the form of some fantastic pork and exceptionally exceptional riders.
OTHO, some lefties are still salivating for a return of the “fairness” doctrine…
“Fairness” doctrine: Pelosi will bring it up in September, I hear tell…
Who needs a Fairness Doctrine? If Pelosi shuts up, I’ll listen. Otherwise, I’ll ignore her. I don’t think I’ve missed much so far, judging by the single digit approval rating.
Usually bipartisanship means Republicans acting like Dems.
Usually bipartisanship means Republicans acting like Dems.
And lousy legislation!
It may become apparent to everyone that with satellite radio, HD FM, and HD AM that the only reason liberals want to regulate how much is said on the air, is to regulate how much is said on the air. Theer certainly is no shortage of outlets!
Good for Arlen. This must mean professional sports are in pretty good shape.
hf,
Specter finally gave in on TapeGate; figured out there was more pressing biz.
Yeah, Spector needs to work on freeing Ira Einhorn again!
Here is more libel news. Please God don’t let me ever be a public figure I think.
Incredibly, Bookfinder lists no 2nd-hand copies of Alms For Jihad, so Cambridge Press’ purge must have been thorough.
[…] from Islamists bent on using foreign libel law to squelch critical speech in the US”; Bipartisan movement in Congress for freedom of speech (and against libel tourism) …. (mypetjawa, wsj, […]
Well, I think I need to say this now, before it becomes illegal tomorrow.
S…, N….., K…., M…, K…, N.., C…., D..H…, and C…..
Phew. Glad to get that off of my chest!
I can go play now.
I just checked around for Alms for Jihad yesterday, and found two copies selling online (try abebooks.com and alibris.com), one for $850 and the other for $950. There was one listed somewhere for $22, but when you clicked on it, the page showed that the book was no longer available. A lot of libraries have the book still, but some are intentionally listing is as “lost” “in search” or “missing.” If you want a copy, find a library with it, or if your library lists it as “lost” “in search” or “missing,” find a sparky librarian and ask to help her go in the back and “find a lost book.”
Oh, and one of the reasons the price has skyrocketed is probably that Robert Collins, one of the coauthors, just passed away. But it may be republished soon because the coauthors evidently got the copyright off Cambridge University Press before Collins passed away, and they are trying to find an American publisher for it.