Home -> Law Blog Directory -> Legal Commentary Blogs -> The Volokh Conspiracy
(866) 635-2689 for Personal Injury or (866) 635-9402 for Criminal Defense
Find a Local Lawyer
Divorce (866) 635-6190
Personal Injury (866) 635-2689
Criminal Defense (866) 635-9402
Legal Commentary
: The Volokh ConspiracyInteresting Free Speech Question:
By David Post
Ari David, who?s running for Congress against long-time incumbent Henry Waxman, raises an interesting and troubling free speech issue on his blog here. Apparently (taking everything he says to be factually correct) he hired some folks to create an iPhone app with text (not surprisingly) highly critical of Waxman ? e.g.,
?HENRY WAXMAN? SUPPORTED Cap & Trade legislation that would have brought us $7 a gallon gas and as President Obama has stated would make electricity rates ?necessarily sky rocket.?
VOTED TO CUT Medicare spending by a half a trillion dollars which would severely hurt seniors. . . .
TRIED to make over-the-counter vitamins and supplements prescription only . . .
TRIED TO STRANGLE family farms with insane Soviet-Style regulation . . .?
Apple, however, has turned them down, on grounds that the app is ?defamatory.?
Does David have any legal recourse here? Probably not. The First Amendment, of course, does not grant him any free speech rights against private actors like Apple, and even if Apple is using the defamation rationale as a pretext for denying his application on purely political grounds (e.g., they like Henry Waxman), there?s nothing (that I know of, anyway) that would stop them from doing that. [David does make an interesting suggestion ? that Apple?s actions constitute an ?in-kind contribution? to Waxman?s campaign, which if true would, I suppose, trigger various election law reporting/disclosure obligations).
It makes for a nice test case for one?s views about the inapplicability of the First Amendment to private actors ? should Apple have some non-discrimination obligation when it comes to allowing people space on their app platform?
[And incidentally, I have a question that I bet some of you can answer for me. What does it mean, exactly, that Apple has rejected their app? I understand that it means that they won?t offer it at their App Store ? but will it not function on anyone?s iPhone unless and until Apple approves? Or if David were to distribute it himself ? off of his own website, say ? would it work as intended?]
Full post as published by The Volokh Conspiracy on May 20, 2010 (boomark / email).
Parody is a Protected Form of Speech
Targets of criticism seek to shut down Internet sites that poke fun
Free Speech
Canterbury agrees to pay $60,000 settlement in civil rights lawsuit.
Indianapolis
alleging the city's police are overly aggressive against the homeless in violation of the protection of free speech and unreasonable searches guaranteed in the US Constitution.
ValueClick
allegedly violated consumer protection laws by promising ‘free’ goods that where not actually free.
Oppenheimer ATM-Free New York Municipals
401(k) / ERISA Stock Fraud
TransUnion
Class action credit practices suit offers free credit monitoring services for millions.
Free Water Sewer Services
US Cold Storage to pay $125,910 in sewer service settlement.

More on censorship, and freedom, in Canada
New L&C Law Scholarship: Can There Really Be “Free Speech” in Public Schools
Public Employment, Free Speech, and Public Concern - Employee Motivation Not Dispositive
IRA STOLL: A big victory for free speech. Meanwhile, an interesting passage from Clarence Thomas








