In 1996 Johnny and Edgar filed suit against DC Comics and the creators of the Jonah Hex: Riders of the Worm and Such limited series, claiming, among other things, defamation: two characters named Johnny and Edgar Autumn, in the series strongly resemble the Winters. The brothers claimed the comics falsely portrayed them as "vile, depraved, stupid, cowardly, subhuman individuals who engage in wanton acts of violence, murder and bestiality for pleasure and who should be killed. Read the "Jonah Hex" case. What happened in this case? What did the court decide? How is this case the similar and yet different from the Spawn case? 4. Read Bobby Bland v B.J. Roberts and Facebook Like. In November, 2009, B.J. Roberts, the sheriff of Hampton, Virginia, ran for re-election. Bobbly Bland and other employees did not want B.J. To be re-elected. B.J. and other employees clicked "Like" on the opponents Facebook campaign page. When B.J. was re-elected he let Bland go on the grounds of harmony and efficiency. What did the court decide and why? Do you agree with the court? 5. What rights do bloggers have under the First Amendment? Should they have First Amendment rights on blogs? Why or why not? 6. In the case of "Don't Date Him Girl lawsuit was the website owner liable for defamation listed on the website against Todd Hollis by Alesia Roskov? Why or why not? Does the website owner have a responsibility to verify the information listed? Is there a difference in the Webmaster being passive or active on the site? 7. What are the two types of gatekeepers online? 8. Recently, Senator Sheldon Whitehouse (D-R.I.) sent a letter to the Department of Justice urging it to commence criminal prosecutions of those companies and individuals who have expressed skepticism regarding man- made climate change. Loretta Lynch, the Attorney General, in her testimony before a Senate committee indicated that she has referred the issue to the FBI to determine whether a criminal case should be brought. Does the First Amendment apply in this case? If so, how? If not, why not? Is it appropriate to criminalize speech with which you do not agree?