Whether the petitioner, an unknown musician and independent filmmaker, who fails to meet the requirements for a limited purpose public figure under Gertz and related cases, can be considered a limited purpose public figure in connection with a matter of public concern, when he had no participation in the matter other than recording the album in 1989

No question identified. : Question #1 In Gertz v. Robert Welch, Inc (1974), the U.S. Supreme Court determined that the plaintiff, a lawyer tangentially involved in the prosecution of a policeman, was not a limited purpose public figure in connection with the controversy surrounding the prosecution because he had not “thrust himself into the vortex of [a] public issue, nor did he engage the public's attention in an attempt to influence its outcome.” 418 US. at 352, 94 S.Ct. 2997. The public figure status of a person in a libel case is to be determined by focusing on the "nature and extent of an individual's participation in the controversy giving rise to the [alleged] defamation." 443 U.S. at 167 (citing Gertz).” As articulated by the Second Circuit, a limited purpose public figure is someone who has: (i) successfully invited public attention to his views in an effort to . influence others prior to the incident that is the subject of the litigation (ii) voluntarily injected himself into a public controversy related to the subject of the ; litigation; (iii) assumed a position of prominence in the public controversy; and (iv) maintained regular and continuing access to the media. Contemporary Mission, Inc. v. New York Times Co., 842 F.2d 612, 617 (2d Cir.1988), citing : Lerman y. Flynt Distrib. Co., Inc., 745 F.2d 123, 136-37 (2d Cir.1984). Whether the petitioner, an unknown musician and independent filmmaker (NPR stated: “Nobody's ever heard of this guy.”), who fails to meet the requirements for a limited purpose public figure under Gertz and the line of cases that consistently require “affirmative steps,” “purposeful activity,” “voluntary” injection, or “invit[ing] public. attention” See James, 40 N.Y.2d at 423, 386 N.Y.S.2d 871, 353 N.E.2d 834; Lerman, . 745 F.2d at 136-37; Contemporary Mission, 842 F.2d at 617; Bruno & Stillman, Inc. v. Globe Newspaper Co., 633 F.2d 583, 588-89 (1st Cir.1980), who did not “thrust himself into the vortex of [a] public issue, nor did he engage the public's attention in an attempt to influence its outcome,” nor did he “voluntarily injected himself into a public controversy related to the subject of the litigation,” nor did he “maintained regular and continuing access to the media (1),” can be considered a limited purpose public Jigure in connection with a matter public concern, when he had no participation in the matter other than recording the album in 1989. Important information to consider: The Supreme Court still has to decide if they considered the cancellation of a record album on Discogs a matter of public concern. (1) Neither National Public Radio contacted (prior to the news or after) the petitioner to give him : the chance to reply and defend himself, nor did any other media outlet offer him a platform to counteract the allegations against him. Question # 2 “In Time, Inc. v. Firestone, 424 U.S. 448, 458, 96 S.Ct. 958, 967, 47 L.Ed.2d 154 (1976), the Supreme Court rejected the equation of "public controversy" with all disputes of interest to the public. Mere newsworthiness, it stated, is not sufficient to ; create a public controversy. See Wolston v. Readers Digest, 443 U.S. at 167-68, 99 S.Ct. at 2707-08. In Avins v. White, 627 F.2d at 647, we cited with approval the District of Columbia Circuit's definition that a public controversy "must be a real dispute, the outcome of which affects the general public or some segment of it." . Waldbaum v. Fairchild Publications, Inc., 627 F.2d 1287, 1296 (D.C.Cir.), cert. denied 449 U.S. 898, 101 S.Ct. 266, 66 L-Ed.2d 128 (1980). To be "public," the dispute must affect more than its immediate participants. Public Interest: is a common concern among citizens in the management and affairs of local, state, and national government, affecting the rights, health, or finances of the public at large. It does not mean mere curiosity. Public Controversy: , is a state of long term dispute or debate, generally about a topic that affects a large ; proportion o