The crux of the debate involves intent, said Kurt Opsahl, senior staff attorney at the Electronic Frontier Foundation, which defends civil rights in the digital world.

"The key is the 'intent to harm,'" Opsahl told The Times. "You can imagine someone saying, 'Well, if you are making a parody of someone else and you are trying to make fun of them and hold them up to ridicule, that would be an attempt to harm them and thus would be within the coverage of the bill. That is the concern."

Wednesday, January 9, 2013
Los Angeles Times