Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

UCSD Vs. Free Speech, Round 2

Posted by timothy on from the controlling-the-terms dept.

Suburbanpride writes "Last year, as Slashdot readers may remember, the University of California, San Diego forced student website UCSDuncensored to change its name to SDuncensored, citing California education code that gives it exclusive rights to the name. This year, the target is youCSD, a student blog that has been critical of the administration. The university denies that the site's content had anything to do with the nastygram they received, which informed them that were in violation for not only the name, but for an image they took of the Geisel Library, which the university claims to hold a trademark on. There are dozens of sites that use UCSD in the name, not to mention the 1000+ members of the UCSD xanga blogring. What's next, campus police stopping people from taking pictures of the library?"

6 of 296 comments (clear)

  1. not fp by Anonymous Coward · · Score: -1, Offtopic

    not fp

    1. Re:not fp by Anonymous Coward · · Score: -1, Offtopic

      or maybe it is

  2. The library looks like a dickhead by Anonymous Coward · · Score: -1, Offtopic

    No wonder they pulled the shot down.

  3. YOU FAILED IT by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Offtopic

    But only because you didn't believe that you could achieve first post. If you had more faith in yourself, you would have been the proud owner of an FP!

  4. i'm sorry by Anonymous Coward · · Score: -1, Offtopic

    but i do believe he fails it since he claims it wasn't FP. too fucking bad. HE FAILS IT

  5. Does Slashdot provide a forum for free speech? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: -1, Offtopic
    Granted, they will not pursue legal action, but say something that offends, and you'll be modded down and often IP-banned for a week.

    Here's an example of something that would be considered unacceptable speech by Slashdot groupthink:

    Brenda Pratt Shafer, a nurse who worked briefly at one of Haskell's clinics, witnessed close up the partial-birth abortion of a baby boy who she said was at 26 and a half weeks.

    "I stood at the doctor's side and watched him perform a partial-birth abortion on a woman who was six months pregnant," Shafer related. "The baby's heartbeat was clearly visible on the ultrasound screen. The doctor delivered the baby's body and arms, everything but his little head. The baby's body was moving. His little fingers were clasping together. He was kicking his feet. The doctor took a pair of scissors and inserted them into the back of the baby's head, and the baby's arms jerked out in a flinch, a startle reaction, like a baby does when he thinks that he might fall. Then the doctor opened the scissors up. Then he stuck the high-powered suction tube into the hole and sucked the baby's brains out. Now the baby was completely limp. I never went back to the clinic. But I am still haunted by the face of that little boy. It was the most perfect, angelic face I have ever seen."