Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®

Law Commons

Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®

Freedom of speech

University of Michigan Law School

2008

Communications Law

Articles 1 - 3 of 3

Full-Text Articles in Law

Long Live The Lie Bill!, Lucila I. Van Dam Dec 2008

Long Live The Lie Bill!, Lucila I. Van Dam

University of Michigan Journal of Law Reform

What successful defamation plaintiffs typically desire and doctrinally deserve is to have their reputations restored. Presently, however, a plaintiff who has established that she was defamed by the defendant is entitled only to an award of damages, which does nothing to restore reputation. This Note proposes that in addition to a damages award, courts-- if they are to take seriously their obligation to compensate the plaintiff-- should order the defendant to retract the defamatory statement. Contrary to the prevailing view, this Note argues that the proposed retraction order does not jeopardize the First Amendment guarantee of free expression.


Taking Safety Seriously: Using Liberalism To Fight Pornography, John M. Kang Jan 2008

Taking Safety Seriously: Using Liberalism To Fight Pornography, John M. Kang

Michigan Journal of Gender & Law

Liberalism, as a jurisprudential principle, need not be pornography's indifferent observer or spineless sycophant; liberalism can be used to fight pornography. In this Article, the author proposes to illuminate what appears to be the most essential aspect of liberalism in its inviolable dedication to peace and safety. By drawing upon the work of the early liberals, the author argues that liberalism's most basic ethos is conceptually incompatible with pornography, as the latter celebrates an unjustified form of violence as its own end.


On Communication, John Greenman Jan 2008

On Communication, John Greenman

Michigan Law Review

Everybody knows that communication is important, but nobody knows how to define it. The best scholars refer to it. Free-speech law protects it. But no one-no scholar or judge-has successfully captured it. Few have even tried. This is the first article to define communication under the law. In it, I explain why some activities-music, abstract painting, and parading-are considered communicative under the First Amendment, while others-sex, drugs, and subliminal advertising-are not. I argue that the existing theories of communication, which hold that communicative behaviors are expressive or convey ideas, fail to explain what is going on in free-speech cases. Instead, …