FREE SPEECH ON THE INTERNET

Internet scribblers have the same First Amendment protections as those in
print and other media, the New York State Supreme Court ruled Dec. 10.

"In the widely watched case of the National Bank of Mexico against
Narconews.com," reported Wired.com, "the court ruled that online
journalists reporting on matters of public importance, like their
colleagues in other media, can only be found guilty of libel if their
actions are deemed malicious. ...

"... The Bank of Mexico - also known as Banamex ... - initiated its lawsuit
against the drug-war investigative reporting Web site in New York state
court last year, when Narconews published reports linking Banamex's
then-president with narcotics trafficking. Banamex charged these
allegations were false and libelous."

New York Supreme Court Justice Paula Omansky wrote, "The nature of the
articles printed on the Web site ... constitute matters of public concern
because the information disseminated relates to the drug trade and its
effect on people living in this hemisphere."

It would make no sense to treat Internet journalism different from printed
journalism." Indeed, most major newspapers nowadays, including The Lima
News, put out Internet editions. Are our online stories less protected than
the same stories in print? Obviously not. Likewise, strictly online
enterprises, such as Narconews.com, should receive the same protection.

State supreme court rulings generally apply only to the specific state
involved. But much-watched cases like this one can have a national
influence as bellwethers. And such cases can be cited elsewhere in court
rulings from the bench.

The Internet is not an abridgement of the First Amendment, but an extension
of it.