First, the context of what got me rumbled (from FTB):
PeeZee wrote:Oh, wait. Then why did you write to me demanding that I remove that comment that disclosed your name and address*, under threat of taking legal action against me? I don’t think that word “absolutely” means what you seem to think it means.Pappa wrote: Something you all need to understand is that while I am 100% supportive of matters of equality, I also absolutely support the right of free speech, even when it is extremely distasteful.
When I read the above I think what I said out loud was something like "BOBORBOGBRSCVIXUWQCUCXX1!1BBOWBCWO?!" though I can't remember the exact phrasing. First to clarify: Pappa didn't threaten to take legal action against PZ. What he said was that if his personal information remained posted that he would get legal advice, which is of course a rational thing to do in that circumstance. Of course it never hurts to exaggerate and assume when you are having a debate for the benefit of your followers! On the second point, it was insanely obvious (a hint is in the "just for a laugh" bit) that it was a joke, but even if it weren't I would have to assume that PZ understands that right to free speech doesn't mean there aren't possible consequences, especially when you are dealing with the reputation of non public figures.PeeZee wrote:Oh, and hey, what about this?
Your commitment to that absolute right to free speech seems to be a bit, you know, elastic.Pappa wrote:Should we sue PZ for libel, like, just for a laugh?
What I'm not sure of is if PZ really doesn't understand the balance that has been established between right to speech and right to privacy, or he is just pretending in order to get his followers worked up. Now, of course (despite not having a PhD!) I am familiar with the fact that it is not a black and white subject and there has been a debate and probably always will about just how far the right to privacy extends. I do know that the right to free speech as a general principle is upheld only when it does not interfere with our other rights. As a general principle freedom of expression doesn't over-rule the right to privacy or protect you from slander. There are certain exceptions given when dealing with public figures (of which, Pappa is not) but it has to be weighed with the benefit or safety of the public.
From: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Right_to_privacy - International Legal Standards on Privacy:
If someone thinks this belongs in the wilder web instead, feel free to move it. I just want to know if there is actually a debate about this, though it seems hard to believe anybody with a highschool education actually is completely unaware of the balance between the right to free speech and freedom of expression and privacy law.Article 8 of the European Convention on Human Rights, which was drafted and adopted by the Council of Europe in 1950 and meanwhile covers the whole European continent except for Belarus and Kosovo, protects the right to respect for private life: "Everyone has the right to respect for his private and family life, his home and his correspondence." Through the huge case-law of the European Court of Human Rights in Strasbourg, privacy has been defined and its protection has been established as a positive right of everyone.
Article 17 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights of the United Nations of 1966 also protects privacy: "No one shall be subjected to arbitrary or unlawful interference with his privacy, family, home or correspondence, nor to unlawful attacks on his honour and reputation. Everyone has the right to the protection of the law against such interference or attacks."

* Sorry, I couldn't help but use at least one emoticon...I understand it speaks to the quality of our community....