Advertisement

Beyond Labels: Pornography, Violence, and Free Speech

  • Edith L. Pacillo
Chapter
Part of the Library of Public Policy and Public Administration book series (LPPP, volume 12)

Abstract

A publisher publishes a manual on how to murder. An individual reads the manual, then murders three people. Does the First Amendment shield the publisher from civil liability for the murders? One court has answered, “No.”A publisher publishes a manual on how to rape. An individual reads the manual and rapes a woman. Does the First Amendment shield the publisher from civil liability for the rape? Courts have suggested that the answer should be “yes.” The only significant difference between these scenarios is that the murder manual has no redeeming social value that requires First Amendment protection, while the fact that pornography leads to violence against women merely shows that it is worthy of protection—which is ironic and unjust. Rice v. Paladin Enterprises provides a new approach for those who seek compensation for injuries when perpetrators use instructional publications as an inspiration for sexual violence. Rice v. Paladin Enterprises holds that the publisher of the how-to style murder manual, Hit Man: A Technical Manual for Independent Contractors, was not entitled to First Amendment protection when a person used the manual to commit three murders. This ruling cleared the way for the publisher to be held civilly liable for aiding and abetting three murders.

References

  1. Balkin, Elise M. 2000. Rice v. paladin: The fourth circuit’s unnecessary limiting of a publisher’s freedom of speech. University of Baltimore Law Review 29: 205–235.Google Scholar
  2. Combs, Nathan Isaac. 2005. Civil aiding and abetting liability. Vanderbilt Law Review 58: 241–300.Google Scholar
  3. Crump, David. 1994. Camouflaged incitement, freedom of speech, communicative torts, and the borderland of the brandenburg test. Georgia Law Review 29: 1–80.Google Scholar
  4. Dixon, Heather S. 2011. A temporary ban on pornography: A first amendment-friendly stride toward gender equality. Southern California Review of Law and Social Justice 20: 433–497.Google Scholar
  5. Fagan, Beth A. 2000. Rice v. Paladin Enterprises: Why Hit Man is beyond the pale. Chicago-Kent Law Review 76: 603–636.Google Scholar
  6. Ford, Jennifer C. 1997. Everything you always wanted to know about pornographer liability (but were afraid to ask). Drake Law Review 46: 233–258.Google Scholar
  7. Fraytak, Dana A. 2001. The influence of pornography on rape and violence against women: A social science approach. Buffalo Women’s Law Journal 9: 263–293.Google Scholar
  8. Freedman, Eric M. 1996. A lot more comes into focus when you remove the lens cap: Why proliferating new communications technologies makes it particularly urgent for the Supreme Court to abandon its inside-out approach to freedom of speech and bring obscenity, fighting words, and group libel within the First Amendment. Iowa Law Review 81: 883–968.Google Scholar
  9. Frug, Mary Joe. 1992. A postmodern feminist legal manifesto (an unfinished draft). Harvard Law Review 105: 1045–1075.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Gerrety, Tom. 1979. Pornography and violence. University Of Pittsburgh Law Review 40: 627–628.Google Scholar
  11. Gibeaut, John. 1998. Deadly advice targeted: Decision allows suit against publisher of murder manual. ABA Journal 84: 24–25.Google Scholar
  12. Hald, Gert Martin, Neil M. Malamuth, and Carlin Yuen. 2010. Pornography and attitudes supporting violence against women: Revisiting the relationship in nonexperimental studies. Aggressive Behavior 36: 14–20.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Kane, Arielle D. 2001. Sticks and stones: How words can hurt. Boston College Law Review 43: 159–191.Google Scholar
  14. Kastanek, Andrianna D. 2004. From hit man to military takeover of New York City: The evolving effects of Rice v. Paladin on Internet censorship. Northwestern University Law Review 99: 383–436.Google Scholar
  15. Keller, Susan Etta. 1993. Viewing and doing: Complicating pornography’s meaning. Georgetown Law Journal 81: 2195–2242.Google Scholar
  16. Khomani, Nadia. 2017. #MeToo: How a hashtag became a rallying cry against sexual harassment. Guardian, October 20.Google Scholar
  17. Kunich, John Charles. 2000. Natural born copycat killers and the law of shock torts. Washington University Law Quarterly 78: 1157–1270.Google Scholar
  18. MacKinnon, Catharine A. 1985. Pornography, civil rights, and speech. Harvard Civil Rights-Civil Liberties Law Review 20: 1–70.Google Scholar
  19. McGraw, Robin R. 2000. Rice v. paladin: Freedom of speech takes a hit with “deep pocket” censorship. Northern Kentucky Law Review 27: 128–161.Google Scholar
  20. Menninger, Karl A., II. 2018. Causes of action against producer, artist, publisher, author for violence incited by a movie, song, or book. Causes of Action 2d 20: 1.Google Scholar
  21. Montz, Vivien Toomey. 2002. Recent incitement claims against publishers and filmmakers: Restraints on first amendment rights on proper limits on violent speech? Virginia Sports & Entertainment Law Journal 1: 171–210.Google Scholar
  22. New York Times. 2016. Transcript: Donald Trump’s taped comments about women. NYTimes.com , October 8. https://mobile.nytimes.com/2016/10/08/us/donald-trump-tape-transcript.html. Accessed 2 Apr 2018.
  23. Pacillo, Edith L. 1994. Getting a feminist foot in the courtroom door: Media liability for personal injury caused by pornography. Suffolk University Law Review 28: 123–152.Google Scholar
  24. Persellin, Melanie Pearl. 2001. Sticks and stones may break my bones, but your words are sure to kill me: A case note on United States v. Alkhabaz. DePaul Law Review 50: 993–1055.Google Scholar
  25. Piety, Tamara R. 2008. Against freedom of commercial expression. Cardozo Law Review 29: 2583–2684.Google Scholar
  26. Sims, Andrew B. 1992. Tort liability for physical injuries allegedly resulting from media speech: A comprehensive First Amendment approach. Arizona Law Review 34: 231–292.Google Scholar
  27. Sunstein, Cass R. 1986. Pornography and the first amendment. Duke Law Journal 1986: 589–627.Google Scholar
  28. Sweet, Martin J. 1994. Blocking the backlash: Against the pornography defense. Kansas Journal of Law & Public Policy 4: 23–33.Google Scholar
  29. Vansen, Lise. 1998. Incitement by any other name: Dodging a First Amendment misfire in Rice v. Paladin enterprises. Hastings Constitutional Law Quarterly 25: 605–633.Google Scholar
  30. Wong, Amanda. 2016. Broken, brutal, bloody: The harms of racial pornography and the need for legal accountability. Georgetown Journal of Law & Modern Critical Race Perspectives 8: 225–250.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  • Edith L. Pacillo
    • 1
  1. 1.AttorneyBoiseUSA

Personalised recommendations