A Right to Offend Book

Assumptions xiii

Part 1 Prosecution 1

1 The Shadow of the Fatwa 3

2 The Treason of the Clerks 14

3 The Abuses of 'Hackgate' 19

Part 2 Defence 33

Section 1 Histories - To Dispel the Shadow of the Fatwa 35

4 Actiones: Cases 36

4.1 Defence of the Seven Sacraments against Martin Luther (1521): For a right of conscience and a right to publish 36

4.2 The Master &'Wardens of the Company of Stationers v. Mr John Milton (1644): For an unlicensed press 45

4.3 R. v. mikes (1774): For libel trial by jury 57

4.4 The Case of Brass Crosby, esq. Lord Mayor of London on a Commitment by the House of Commons (1771): For the reporting of Parliament 65

4.5 R. v. Hetherington (1841): For the end of press taxation 68

5 Consensu: Agreed 80

5.1 The King v. John Peter Zenger (1735): Press freedom in the United States 80

5.2 R. v. Joseph Howe, Darling v. Hall, The Crown Colony of New Zealand v. Quaife (1835-1840): A pattern 92

5.3 New York Herald v. New York Sun (1835-1924): Mass circulation 95

5.4 La Loi du 29 juillet 1881 sur la liberte de la presse (1881): Press freedom in the West 99

6 Non Sequitur: It Doesn't Follow 115

6.1 Ernst von Wolzogen v. the Censors (1901): Censoring theatre 115

6.2 Mutual Film Corporation v. Ohio Industrial Commission (1915): Censoring cinema 124

7 Ex Concessis: Consequentially 132

7.1 'Improvement in Telegraphy', US Letters Patent No. 174,465 (1867): Electrifying communication, designing out freedom 132

7.2 Samuel 'Roxy' Rothafel v. American Telephone & Telegraph (1923): American radio 138

7.3 The British Broadcasting Corporation v. Mr George Formby (1937): Britain's 'third way' 155

7.4 The BBC v. Lord Beveridge (1942): The limits of radio freedom 169

8 Et Cetera: And So On 184

8.1 The Baird Television Development Co. v. Electrical Mechanical Industries Co. (1936):'Inventing' television 184

8.2 In Re: The Bobo Doll (1958): The effects of television 190

8.3 Edward R. Murrow v. Senator Joseph R. McCarthy (1951): The limits of television freedom 199

9 Obita Dicta: Opinion 211

9.1 Noyce v. Kilby (1969): The coming of the digital 211

9.2 Paul Baran v. AT&T (1964): Digitizing communications 217

9.3 Authors Guild Inc., Association of American Publishers Inc. et al. v. Google, Inc. (2008): Impact 225

9.4 Daily Herald v. Sun (1964): Convergence 238

9.5 Julian Assange v. the World (2010): The technicist illusion of freedom 244

Section 2 Enlightenment - To Frustrate the Treason of the Clerks 255

10 Audi Alterem Partem: Hear the Other Side 256

10.1 Sir Tom Stoppard v. Heinrich Heine (2006): In defence of free expression 256

10.2 Gray et al. v. Todorov et al. (2008): In defence of the Enlightenment 258

Section 3 Law - To Correct the Abuses of Hackgate 267

11 Rationes Decidendi: The Reasons for Decision 268

11.1 Sir Paul Stephenson et al. v. Alan Rusbridger and Paul Johnson (2010-11): Guarding the guardians 268

11.2 National Socialist Party of America v. Village of Skokie (1977): Gesture as speech 269

11.3 Chaplinsky v. State of New Hampshire (1942): Speech as deed 272

11.4 United States v. One Book Called 'Ulysses' (1933): Obscenity 275

11.5 Gay News Ltd and Lemon v. United Kingdom (1982): Blasphemy 280

11.6 Attorney-General (United Kingdom) v. Heinemann Publishers Australia Pty Ltd (1988): Sedition 290

11.7 Hammond v. DPP [2004]: The limits of protected speech 295

11.8 Reynolds v. Times Newspapers Ltd [1999]: Defamation 298

12 Causa Sine Qua Non: The Indispensible Cause 311

12.1 Campbell v. MGN Ltd [2004]: Privacy 311

12.2 Hustler Magazine, Inc. v. Falwell (1988): The 'Offence Principle' 322

12.3 Doe v. University of Michigan (1989): From 'civility' to 'hate' 328

12.4 Schenck v. United States"(1919): Proof of damage 337

12.5 Sir Ian Trethowan v. Tom Mangold (1981): Dangers of regulation 348

Conclusions 353

Notes 356

References 372

Index 399