What, you thought this would stop with magazines? Why do you think we call this webpage Down With Everybody?
This is about precedent, baby. Get people used to that big, bad net. Shut ’em up good.
From Andrew Coyne’s live-blog on the Maclean’s/British Columbia Human Rights Tribunal hearing:
3:50 PM
Back from a break, as the tribunal members wrestle with yet another ruling on admissibility in the absence of rules of evidence. They’ve decided again to sort-of admit questioning about the “impact,” not of Steyn’s article, but of various, mostly obscure blogs who were allegedly “inspired” by Steyn’s piece. Understand: we’re now to be subjected to the state’s inquisition, not for anything that appeared in the magazine, but for whatever lunatic ramblings might appear anywhere in the blogosphere!3:58 PM
And of course, as [Maclean’s magazine lawyer] McConchie is pointing out, the tribunal has already ruled that it doesn’t have jurisdiction over internet posts…3:59 PM
Overruled.4:10 PM
Now we’re into, not even blogs, but comments left on a YouTube post. Is bathroom grafitti next?
The rest.
Down With Everybody 