[free-sklyarov] [DMCA_discuss] CNET - Security workers: Copyright law stifles

[Jeme A Brelin]

On Fri, 7 Sep 2001, Xcott Craver wrote:
> Ah, but such a person would be charged with murder.  There is no need
> to punish or outlaw the speech itself, any more than it is to outlaw
> the murderous thoughts, or quiet sneakers, that also contributed to
> the killing.
>
> You don't need to outlaw speech to deal with yelling "fire" in
> a crowded theater (and *that's* why it's such a bad example.)
> You can simply charge people with murder or manslaughter, or
> whatever damage for which they were directly responsible.

This was not my interpretation of the original poster's argument nor of
the Supreme Court's famous description of "shouting 'Fire!'".

The Court did not say that it is ILLEGAL to shout "Fire!" in a crowded
theater.  The Court stated that your freedom of speech does not absolve
you of responsibility for those actions.

How do you say that a person has both the RIGHT to shout "Fire!" in a
crowded theater and the RESPONSIBILITY not to?

As much as murder or maiming, inciting panic or riot or disturbing the
peace are both crimes.  The public welfare is as much served by
government's protection of the general peace as the protection of
individual life and limb.

The Court resolved this by saying that there are cases where the
responsibility of your speech overrides the government's inability to
restrict your freedom.

That is to say, they can't make it ILLEGAL to shout "Fire!" in a crowded
theater, but you can be held responsible for commiting a crime by shouting
"Fire!" in a crowded theater.

It's a very touchy situation.

J.
-- 
   -----------------
     Jeme A Brelin
    jeme at brelin.net
   -----------------
 [cc] counter-copyright
 http://www.openlaw.org