Cox was ruled that she had to stand trial twice because she was accused of defamation against a financial company. She was a blogger who wrote entries about the company including statements about fraud and conspiracy. In the first trial she was found guilty because she had no proof that what she wrote was true. The first court ruled that as long as one of her posts appeared defamatory then she was found guilty. The financial company’s attorney argued that she was ruining the company’s reputation. When she asked for a different trial in a different court she was able to reverse the charges and she was found not guilty. The new court ruled that the matter was of public concern so the blogger Cox had the right to write about it even though she was not a journalist.