On Sun, 23 Feb 2003, Chuq Von Rospach wrote:
> On Sunday, February 23, 2003, at 02:54 PM, Rich Kulawiec wrote:
> > And if it *were* free speech, I would defend it, as I have defended
> > other
> > free speech causes on the 'net for over twenty years.
> > But it's not. It's not speech at all. It's conduct.
> that's your interpretation, and it's one the court pretty strongly
> disagrees with...
Actually, making a distinction between speech and conduct is a
concept the courts strongly embrace. To cite an extreme example,
you can't burn down someone's house as an act of free expression.
The courts have not addressed the issue of unsolicited email so
that specific issue is still in question. The idea that you can
do anything you wish in the name of free speech is definitely not
- murr -