On Tuesday, Judge Edward Rafeedie denied a motion by the Santa Barbara News-Press to delay the start of their federal copyright infringement trial against The Santa Barbara Independent.
The daily wanted more time to prepare for their case and determine what evidence they could take from The Indy, requesting a start date of the jury trial no sooner than late March 2008. But Judge Rafeedie determined that the News-Press' attorneys failed to show good cause, and denied their request with no further explanation.
Specifically, the News-Press' attorneys requested an extension because they are hoping to compel The Indy's executive editor Nick Welsh to reveal his sources. This may be the first time ever that one newspaper has tried to get another newspaper's reporter to divulge his or her sources, as confidentiality of sources is a privilege that's usually treated as sacrosanct in the profession of journalism.
The Indy's attorneys insinuated as much in their argument to deny the delay, explaining that the News-Press is "watching the legal fees needlessly escalate." Given that the News-Press's attorney said in court that the paper's desire is solely "to punish" The Independent, the weekly's attorneys suggest that the proposed delay would perhaps be a means of doing so, due to the growing attorney's fees.
As well, The Indy's attorneys posited that this delay may just be a ploy for the daily's legal squad to get more information out of The Indy to strengthen several other legal squabbles the News-Press is embroiled in. Those cases include an arbitration case against former editor Jerry Roberts, an attack on American Journalism Review correspondent Susan Paterno (another apparent first in journalism, where one newspaper sues an individual reporter), the ongoing battle against the newsroom's unionization, and the fight against the feds who have argued that the newspaper broke many federal labor laws.
Meanwhile, the News-Press has not been forthcoming with much of the evidence requested by The Independent. (In that regard, the weekly's attorneys are in the process of filing a motion to compel the daily to respond to evidence requests that its attorneys have so far rejected.)
Those arguments proved persuasive enough to the judge, and he denied the News-Press' motion. A mandatory settlement conference between the two newspapers will soon be scheduled before the January 29 jury trial begins.
Related Links
Double-clicking on any word or phrase in this story will open a reference window with definitions and links to other reference material.

Print friendly
E-mail story
Tip Us Off
iPod friendly
Comments
Bookmark This
Previous Month


Comments
Discussion Guidelines
Once again the News-Press strives to reach a new low in sleaze and meanness, and astonishingly they have succeeded. How sad that a once fine newspaper has been brought to this sorry state by a rich spoiled brat!
Noletaman (anonymous profile)
December 12, 2007 at 4:22 p.m. (Suggest removal)
This trial will be GREAT!
I really want to read about what damages the News-Less has suffered from the publishing for a couple of days of their own news article they never intended to publish.
This obviously means they think that a true and fair account of their implosion hurts their business, even without the accurate quotes yelled by Jane Hulse and Starshine Roshell.
FirstDistrictStreetfighter (anonymous profile)
December 12, 2007 at 6:14 p.m. (Suggest removal)
This is just a first wave of McCaws, the one that created our monster is moving here with his latest creature .Will the sandbox be big enough ? Seattle go home!!!!
Mugu (anonymous profile)
December 14, 2007 at 4:14 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Post a comment