Slashdot Mirror
PA Appeals Court Weighs Punishment For Students' Online Parodies
crimeandpunishment writes "Is it a student's right to free speech or a school's right to discipline? A US Appeals Court in Pennsylvania heard arguments Thursday on a case that could have far-reaching implications. The issue involves the suspension of two students, from two different Pennsylvania school districts, for web postings they made on their home computers. The students posted parody profiles on MySpace that mocked their principals. The American Civil Liberties Union argued on behalf of the students."
Sorry, you are wrong. Libel and Slander are not criminal offenses. They are civil offenses and this gives the principle a cause of action. So, he can sue.
Actually - it wasn't libel.
The Jerry Fallwell case against Hustler failed on EXACTLY these grounds. Fundamental to the law is that "if there is no reasonable chance that anybody would take the claims seriously - the jury is REQUIRED to find the publisher INNOCENT."
It is ONLY possible to be guilty of libel if the people familiar with the target would reasonably BELIEVE the claims. Since the school board themselves have testified that "nobody took the claims seriously" - it is therefore absolutely NOT libel.
I don't LIKE the nature of this parody, but it IS in fact protected parody under U.S. law and the student acted entirely within her first amendment rights.
Unicode killed the ASCII-art *
intentionally misrepresenting someone as something that is patently false is libel or slander depending on how it is done. This is a criminal offense.
What country are you from? First of all, libel is not a criminal offense in the U.S. (or most other democratic countries). Libel hasn't been a criminal matter since the American Revolution.
Libel is a civil offense, and the subject of the libel is limited to suing for damages in civil court.
Second of all, intentionally misrepresenting someone for purposes of satire and parody is specifically protected by the First Amendment and the Supreme Court. If the claims are so outrageous that no reasonable person would believe them, there's no libel. The more outrageous the claims, the weaker the case for libel.
The leading case is Hustler Magazine, Inc. et al. v. Jerry Falwell. Falwell sued Hustler for an advertisement parody that portrayed him as having had a drunken sexual encounter with his mother in an outhouse.
http://www.firstamendmentcenter.org/speech/arts/topic.aspx?topic=parody_satire
As the judge said in TFA, you can make it a teachable moment. People in the U.S. have a right to satirize figures of authority. Satire can be painful, but that's the price we pay for a free society.