Comments on: The Right to Read

By: “You Can’t Burn a Kindle” — The Late Age of Print

“You Can’t Burn a Kindle” — The Late Age of Print — Mon, 07 Dec 2009 15:33:17 +0000

[...] Alexie cites concerns over piracy and privacy as his motivation for doing so. I’ve noted here on the blog how certain e-book devices can expose book lovers to all sorts incursions into their [...]

By: Ted Striphas

Ted Striphas — Mon, 09 Nov 2009 00:57:22 +0000

It's currently under review, but I'd be happy to send you a draft of the piece if you're interested. Drop me a line at: striphas@thelateageofprint.org

By: Mary M.

Mary M. — Mon, 09 Nov 2009 00:20:01 +0000

Ted, When and where will your essay appear? I’d like to read it? Mary

By: theorywatch » The late age of print

theorywatch » The late age of print — Sat, 24 Oct 2009 22:39:42 +0000

[...] age of print:” he’s blogging fascinating ideas, such as reviving the idea of making the right to read constitutionally protected. This is going straight to my “right to read right now” pile [...]

By: Ted Striphas

Ted Striphas — Thu, 01 Oct 2009 19:40:06 +0000

Yes, Gil, good call–Cohen bases her argument about a right to read largely on Lamont. The other key precedent she cites is Stanley v. Georgia, where “the Court ruled that a state could not criminalize the private possession of ‘obscene’ materials.” There’s also DAETC v. FCC, McIntyre v. Ohio Elections Commission, and NAACP v. Alabama, all of which (if I remember correctly) take Lamont as a touchstone.

By: Gil

Gil — Thu, 01 Oct 2009 03:44:41 +0000

I’m gonna be geeky (and curious) about this.

Does Cohen base her “right to read” argument in part on Lamont v. Postmaster General? Short version (largely from memory) is that the SCOTUS struck down a US Postal regulation requiring would-be recipients of mailed “communist propaganda” to affirm their desire to receive said materials, and did do (in part) under the logic that freedom of speech was meaningless if the government could simply make audiences illegal.