Now that one level of the court system has ruled that the First Amendment does not protect Paladin Press against a lawsuit over its sale of the book "Hit Man," it may be timely to mention some of the issues. It is often claimed (here, too) that "anyone may sue." This is true. Just pay a filing fee, etc., and anyone can sue. Alice can sue Bob because he is reading "War and Peace." I can sue Suzie because I didn't like the color of the dress she wore. And so on, so the theory goes. However, the court system need not let the suit proceed. Many (most?) filed lawsuits are dismissed on "matters of law." Thus, Alice's lawsuit against Bob over Bob's choice of reading materials would be thrown out. (And the courts have even taken steps against those who have filed many frivolous lawsuits with the apparent intent of harassment. ) It is in this sense that today's court decision allowing the suit against Paladin to proceed is so pernicious. In a society where free speech and free dissemination of ideas is protected by the First Amendment, a lawsuit to stop others from reading or writing certain thoughts should be thrown out immediately. On a "matter of law." I'm not a lawyer, but my layman's understanding of "matter of law" is that an act must have some element of illegality under the criminal code, or under contract law, before a lawsuit can proceed. Thus, I cannot sue a restaurant because it chooses not to serve my favorite food, nor can Alice sue Bob over his choice of reading materials. Nor should anyone be allowed to sue Paladin Press when no evidence of illegality has been shown (Paladin was not implicated as a co-conspirator in the murder, and the book "Hit Man" is not illegal to sell). I expect the Paladin Press case will go to the Supreme Court now. I hope it does, at least. And it'll be interesting to see if the ACLU supports a politically incorrect case like this. --Tim May The Feds have shown their hand: they want a ban on domestic cryptography ---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---- Timothy C. May | Crypto Anarchy: encryption, digital money, ComSec 3DES: 408-728-0152 | anonymous networks, digital pseudonyms, zero W.A.S.T.E.: Corralitos, CA | knowledge, reputations, information markets, Higher Power: 2^2,976,221 | black markets, collapse of governments. "National borders aren't even speed bumps on the information superhighway."
At 9:17 AM -0800 11/11/97, Tim May wrote:
I expect the Paladin Press case will go to the Supreme Court now. I hope it does, at least. And it'll be interesting to see if the ACLU supports a politically incorrect case like this.
The 4th Circuit dec'n in Paladin is up on the FindLaw site, though when I got it this morning parts of it were mixed up -- some footnote material got into the body of the opinion. These are among the amici on the appellate brief. I'd guess they all weighed in on Paladin's side. It's a "publisher's rights" case -- not that tough to pick sides. AMERICAN CIVIL LIBERTIES UNION FOUNDATION; AMERICAN CIVIL LIBERTIES UNION OF THE NATIONAL CAPITOL AREA; AMERICAN CIVIL LIBERTIES UNION OF COLORADO; ABC, INCORPORATED; AMERICA ONLINE, INCORPORATED; ASSOCIATION OF AMERICAN PUBLISHERS; THE BALTIMORE SUN COMPANY; E.W. SCRIPPS COMPANY; FREEDOM TO READ FOUNDATION; MAGAZINE PUBLISHERS OF AMERICA, INCORPORATED; MCCLATCHY NEWSPAPERS, INCORPORATED; MEDIA GENERAL, INC.; MEDIA PROFESSIONAL INSURANCE; NATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF BROADCASTERS; NEWSPAPERS ASSOCIATION OF AMERICA; THE NEW YORK TIMES; THE REPORTERS COMMITTEE FOR FREEDOM OF THE PRESS; SOCIETY OF PROFESSIONAL JOURNALISTS; THE WASHINGTON POST Lee Tien
participants (2)
-
Lee Tien
-
Tim May