Ludlow's defamation claim against news outlets loses on appeal

I was just sent a copy of the appellate court's opinion, concerning this case, and it turns out the earlier news article misdescribed the trial court's decision rather badly, making it sound as though the judge thought the article admitted of an "innocent construction" because the "sting" of allegedly groping someone was the same as the "sting" of being accused of rape.  That was a terrible argument, which suggested bias on the part of the judge against the plaintiff.  But based on the appellate court's decision, that wasn't the "innocent construction" argument at all:  rather, the articles admitted of an innocent construction because they did not name Ludlow (or the student for that matter), and so could not constitute defamation per se.   That is a very different, and actually more plausible, argument, at least given American libel law which, as we have noted before, is more friendly to defamers than libel law in any other democracy.

UPDATE:  Weinberg has uploaded a copy of the opinion here.