IP: More on student loses speech case against Univ of California

[David Farber <dave@farber.net>]

>
>From: Declan McCullagh <declan@well.com>
>Subject: FC: More on student loses speech case against Univ of California
>Cc: levic@engineering.ucsb.edu, li@graddiv.ucsb.edu, David.birnbaum@ucop.edu,
>    flange@engineering.ucsb.edu, stucky@chem.ucsb.edu,
>    d_morse@lifesci.lscf.ucsb.edu
>
>**********
>In response to: http://www.politechbot.com/p-02037.html
>
>I am copying university officials who have been involved in this affair at 
>one time or another in case they would like the opportunity to reply.
>
>-Declan
>**********
>
>From: "Harvey A. Silverglate" <has@world.std.com>
>To: <declan@well.com>, <politech@politechbot.com>
>Cc: "'Brown, Christopher'" <cbrown@peoplelink.com>
>Subject: RE: Judge sides with Univ of California in student free speech case
>Date: Thu, 17 May 2001 12:37:43 -0400
>In-Reply-To: <5.0.2.1.0.20010517110806.02004380@mail.well.com>
>
>Declan,
>         I just want to add a couple of points to Chris Brown's report on 
> the status
>of his litigation.
>         (I speak, incidentally, in my role as a co-Director and officer 
> of The
>Foundation for Individual Rights in Education ("FIRE") <www.thefire.org>,
>which has been supporting Chris from early-on, has been in communication
>with the University, and has been cooperating with Chris' attorneys.)
>         The thesis committee had approved Chris' thesis, as a mater of 
> academic
>evaluation and judgment, until the committee members learned that a
>"Disacknowledgement" section had been tacked on to the thesis as finally
>submitted. Thus, there is no doubt that the only reason the thesis had been
>rejected was because of his criticism of the University. Indeed, when the
>refusal to give him his degree became public, they granted him the degree
>but refused to file the thesis in the normal course.
>         Correspondence that I had, in my capacity as an officer of FIRE, with
>University officers, demonstrates clearly that the University's position is
>that they don't have to "publish" something that they view as obnoxious or
>personally critical of them or of the University. Hence, this is a very
>clean-cut First Amendment issue.
>         Finally, the University rests its refusal in large measure on its 
> claim
>that to allow the thesis to be filed officially and formally would be
>equivalent to the University's adopting in some way the contents, including
>the Disaknowledtgements. This raises the issue not only of whether a
>university's approving a thesis is equivalent to "adopting" it somehow, but,
>more specifically, whether an "Acknowledgement" section or a
>"Disacknowledgement" section is part of the thesis for such purposes, or
>whether it states the personal views of the author and cannot be attributed
>to the University or its officers or faculty. It seems clear to me that the
>latter is true.
>         The trial judge in this case seems to have acted with an unusual 
> degree of
>ignorance of the law and disregard of the facts. As Chris said, given this
>particular judge's reputation we were not expecting otherwise. Onward to the
>appellate court.
>
>                                         Harvey A. Silverglate
>                                         The Foundation for Individual 
> Rights in Education
>
>
>
>
>
>-------------------------------------------------------------------------
>POLITECH -- Declan McCullagh's politics and technology mailing list
>You may redistribute this message freely if it remains intact.
>To subscribe, visit http://www.politechbot.com/info/subscribe.html
>This message is archived at http://www.politechbot.com/
>-------------------------------------------------------------------------
>



For archives see: http://www.interesting-people.org/