This isn’t the first time this has been done. In the early days of the Web (1995 I think), someone bought the entire Oregon DMV file and posted it on the Internet, SSNs, VINs and all, for a week. At the time George Allen was proposing to have Virginia sell its DMV data to private buyers to raise money for the state. That proposal died soon thereafter.

The danger of yelling “Fire” in a crowded theatre is of initiating a panic.

In this case, to beat the comparison to death, the state has already done the yelling by publishing the information. The state is culpable as the prime yeller. For the state simultaneously to yell while attempting to punish someone else for repeating the state’s own yells is legally insupportable, as well as hypocritical.

I think her means of protest is, at best, indiscreet and reckless, but no more indiscreet and reckless as the state’s own actions, but that is independent of the legal issue here, which is whether it is criminal.

How is it a good idea to publish someone’s SSN to prove that it is a bad idea to publish someone’s SSN.

There are limits to all the amendments.

Based on this ruling, it is ok for me to yell “FIRE” in a movie theatre to prove it is a bad idea for me to do the same.

So, confused or stupid?

It is a good ruling and good law. The state was trying to punish someone for publishing what the state itself had already published.

At the same time, I think that, as a form of protest, broadcasting someone else’s personal information and increasing the chance of identity theft as a protest is–er–less defensible.

It’s an old saying that, in civil liberties cases, the defendant is often the worst exhibit.

At first, I questioned how the posting of someone else’s SSN could be protected until the First Amendment, but after reading more, I have to agree with Judge Duncan. The whole reason for posting the SSN is to call attention to the fact that the information is already available online, and forcing Ostergren to remove the information would be a major blow to her message, and thus infringe on her right of free speech.

The real question should be, and this is a credit to Ostergren’s work, why is the government posting records with peoples’ SSN on them, especially when the GA has banned the publishing of this information? Shouldn’t the effort be to fix the problem, rather than attack the person calling attention to it?