My view is that if it is indeed *legal* than it does fall under protection of
the First Amendment, and should not have "consequences" from a legal
standpoint.
I realize when a condition is bordering on a particular law or laws, that
a case can be made in a court. Does this mean we passively stand back
and apply 100% political correctness testing to anything that is published,
or do we push the legal limits (and / or the ethical limits)? This is such a
new area, I guess we will have to wait for a major "test case" to arise....
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Jim's page was well within acceptable legal limits, and he also did the
courteous and honorable thing when he received the complaint.
<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<
I agree completely. Obviously CMP felt that some limit had been exceeded
and wanted to voice their opinion. Jim did, in my opinion, the courteous
and honorable thing as well. However, their letter sounded threatening
(legally) and now, since it was within the law, did Jim *really* do the right
thing by going along with them? Wasn't he "forced" into doing the "right
thing" by threat of legal action?
If everyone were to cave in to *anyone* being offended, what good is
the First Amendment?
This particular instance has raised many good questions - at least for
me....