January 14, 2005
Stickers Slapped Down
We knew that putting stickers on stuff could get you in trouble with the law, and that sticker literature is subversive and charged by the context it appears in, but those folks down in Cobb County went way beyond what we did with Implementation. They were so radical in their sticker writing – back in 2002, no less – that they’ve just managed to get a federal judge to write an analysis of their work. (On Slashdot, there was much rejoicing.) It’s bad enough that Georgia Tech is such an innovative place when it comes to digital media, but you’d think that those of us in other states might at least be able to develop the most controversial and groundbreaking sticker literature…
January 14th, 2005 at 11:54 am
I went to Georgia Tech. Funky CoC and STAC programs aside, it’s a very conservative campus. I haven’t been there this week, but I have no doubt that there is much hissing and gnashing of teeth at this news among the very active Campus Crusade crowd.
January 16th, 2005 at 6:27 pm
The analysis in CNN is odd. It seems to say that the sticker is only unconstitutional because of the background of the people who put it there. If the same sticker had’ve been placed by atheists, would it be OK?
January 16th, 2005 at 10:51 pm
IANAL, as they say, and I haven’t read the court’s decision, but it wouldn’t surprise me if that’s actually the case. I think it’s not the background of people that matters, but what they intend. The development of the intentional fallacy doesn’t seem to have permeated legal scholarship. From what I understand, you can write or say the same thing and it can be actionable/criminal in some cases (e.g., if it’s meant a serious death threat, or if it’s published in the New York Times) and not in others (e.g., if it’s meant as a joke, or if it’s published in The Onion).