Re: Fraud and free speech

[Bill Frantz <frantz@netcom.com>]

At 5:27 PM -0700 6/8/97, Tim May wrote:
>(Oh, and it almost goes without saying that the same "lies" William and
>others are so worried about in "commercial" speech happen all the time in
>non-commerical speech. For every example of where commercial speech
>involves lies or fraud, I can find similar or fully equivalent
>non-commercial examples, ranging from lies like "I love you" to get a
>partner into bed to deliberate misstatements to mislead an opponent. Why
>should such "lies" be protected while putatively commercial speech is to be
>subjected to an increasing number of limitations?)

The only justification I can think of off hand is that a presumption of
truth may make for more efficient markets.  On the other hand, it also has
very bad effects when applied to political speech.


-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Bill Frantz       | The Internet was designed  | Periwinkle -- Consulting
(408)356-8506     | to protect the free world  | 16345 Englewood Ave.
frantz@netcom.com | from hostile governments.  | Los Gatos, CA 95032, USA