| In the offline world, we've seen this | | | | deliver email messages when a spammer tried |
| intersection in (among other situations) U.S. | | | | to send spam through AOL's network. In other |
| Supreme Court cases addressing private speech | | | | words, in theory, courts could do something |
| at privately owned company towns and shopping | | | | about providers squelching speech, but have |
| centers. In some cases, the Supreme Court has | | | | sided with providers because the Constitution |
| said that certain landowners cannot prevent | | | | doesn't apply in these cases. But how do we |
| speakers from speaking on their private | | | | distinguish between AOL's response to spam |
| property. However, in other cases, the | | | | (which seems right) and a virtual world's |
| landowner's property rights have trumped the | | | | decision to kick off a user? In both cases, |
| speaker's right to speak on the property, | | | | the online provider can choose, but we're |
| allowing the landowner to "censor" the | | | | tempted to side with AOL on spam and side |
| speaker.In the online world, the speech | | | | against virtual world providers on everything |
| rights dichotomy raises equally complex | | | | else. It's that inconsistency that I'm trying |
| issues. Online private actors routinely use | | | | to address here.The virtual world industry is |
| their private property (such as computers and | | | | burgeoning. Millions of users participate in |
| networks) to create virtual spaces designed | | | | such complex interactive spaces as EverQuest, |
| for speech, although speaker access is | | | | Second Life, World of Warcraft, and The Sims |
| usually controlled by contract. An online | | | | Online. With the emergence of these "virtual |
| provider exercising its property or contract | | | | worlds," we must once again consider how we |
| rights inevitably squelches a speaker's | | | | balance a customer's speech against a virtual |
| rights. But despite online providers' | | | | world provider's rights to squelch speech. To |
| capacity to exercise their rights | | | | strike a balance, we must decide whether |
| capriciously, courts so far have unanimously | | | | virtual worlds are more like physical world |
| held that private online providers are not | | | | company towns or shopping centers, or are |
| state actors for First Amendment purposes. In | | | | just another category of online providers. |
| one representative case, AOL could refuse to | | | | |