It would be interesting to analyze this and the Harvard Law school analysis vis-a-vis the need for technology literacy. 

During the flamefest about weblogs.com hosting, Yale Law School's LawMeme tried to analyze the story from a legal point of view, got most of the basic facts wrong, and therefore arrived at a wildly incorrect conclusion (along with some childish name-calling). Looking at this after the flames have died down, I wonder if they would like to take another look and see if they'd like to tell the story again, based on what actually happened. And maybe they could tell the story of how their condemnation came to be, based on so little information? If technologists have an obligation to treat users fairly (they do, no argument there) do lawyers have the same obligation, according to Yale Law School? [Scripting News]