| Submit your comments on this article |
| -Short Attention Span Theater- |
| Judge tosses Savage's suit against Islamic group |
| 2008-07-28 |
| AP seem to have filed this under "Entertainment News". SAN FRANCISCO (AP) - A federal judge has dismissed a lawsuit filed by conservative radio talk show host Michael Savage against an Islamic civil rights group over its use of a portion of his show in which he called the Quran a "book of hate." Savage sued the Council on American-Islamic Relations, or CAIR, for copyright infringement and racketeering lawsuit late last year, claiming the group violated his rights by using a segment of his "Savage Nation" show in a letter-writing campaign to get advertisers to boycott the program. In the broadcast used by CAIR, Savage also called the Muslim holy book "a throwback document." In her ruling Friday, U.S. District Judge Susan Illston said people who listen to a public broadcast are entitled to use excerpts for purposes of comment and criticism. She also said no evidence was presented to show that advertising on the show's broadcast was affected by CAIR's actions. The racketeering element of the lawsuit alleged that CAIR was not a civil rights group, but a political organization with ties to terrorist groups. CAIR denies those claims, saying it opposes terrorism and religious extremism. In an interview with The Associated Press after he filed the lawsuit in December, Savage said he was referring to Iran's president Mahmoud Ahmadinejad and his violent brand of Islamic extremism in the broadcast, not about the religion in general. Savage's attorney, Daniel Horowitz, told the San Francisco Chronicle he plans to file a new racketeering suit. |
| Posted by:gorb |
| #7 In her ruling Friday, U.S. District Judge Susan Illston said people who listen to a public broadcast are entitled to use excerpts for purposes of comment and criticism. It's called "fair use," and it's the reason you can quote Robert Fisk for the purpose of fisking him without getting tagged for copyright infringement. |
| Posted by: Mike 2008-07-28 13:35 |
| #6 In her ruling Friday, U.S. District Judge Susan Illston said people who listen to a public broadcast are entitled to use excerpts for purposes of comment and criticism. Tell that to the NFL or MLB. |
| Posted by: Deacon Blues 2008-07-28 12:20 |
| #5 He's trying to show CAIR that he can play the lawsuit game too and soak them for a ton of money just for fun. Just like they use it as a hammer to silence people, and tried to use it against him. I say its high time someone declared war on those guys, I'm a Savage neutral, but he's got the money to torment them a little, so good on him. |
| Posted by: bigjim-ky 2008-07-28 12:13 |
| #4 I'm with OS on this. I remember reading the .pdf of the Savage filing and trying to find a plain statement of the damages to Savage and what caused the damages. After a short period of reading I gave up -- there was so much fluff it was nearly unreadable. |
| Posted by: mhw 2008-07-28 11:41 |
| #3 Now this is interesting. In her ruling Friday, U.S. District Judge Susan Illston said people who listen to a public broadcast are entitled to use excerpts for purposes of comment and criticism. |
| Posted by: phxrav 2008-07-28 11:39 |
| #2 Savage is a loudmouth, and quite frequently and idiotic loudmouth, Being a loudmotuh comes with a price - people can and will use your words against you. Savage shoudl try being a man instead of a 2 bit loudmouth behind a microphone. Stand up and take the consequences for his actions. Savage deserved to lose this suit. |
| Posted by: OldSpook 2008-07-28 10:19 |
| #1 I have no idea whether or not it was valid to throw Savage's lawsuit, but it causes me to question the timing of the recent media blitz that hyped a bogus claim that Savage had said that autism was nothing but a fraud. I'm not a Savage supporter, so please don't tell why I should not support him. I just happened to hear the segment on autism (was forced to listen) and by no stretch of the imagination was he implying that autism was a fraud. As was discussed on a previous rantburg thread, he was speaking only to the issue of expanding the diagnosis of autism to individuals who might well be damaged by that diagnosis or label. |
| Posted by: Percy Spumble4268 2008-07-28 09:17 |