OK, it's only a minor victory, but it's one in a particularly egregious case. A judge in Michigan had ruled that a man in Texas had to take his non-commercial Web site criticizing a shopping mall developer offline, and enjoined him from publishing his criticisms. The bizarre justification for this First Amendment violation? Because it was non-commercial speech, the Texan wouldn't lose anything if he had to be quiet while the full case was litigated in court.

The same judge, by the way, had previously refused to move the case to Texas where both the man and the shopping mall in question are located, had spanked the Texan for not following court procedures while forgiving similar errors from the complaining corporation, and in general indicated that he didn't believe the guy had any right to criticize a company. Read the entire protest Web site for the unbelievable history. And kudos to the Sixth Circuit for at least temporarily fixing this completely ridiculous ruling.