Here's a grey area:
From Reuters

Kobe Bryant’s accuser says her privacy is threatened

EAGLE (Colorado): A lawyer for the woman who has accused basketball star Kobe Bryant of rape was set to argue on Monday that court filings should no longer be published on the Internet because of errors that have identified the woman and jeopardised her safety.

The court filings will be one of several issues taken up during Monday’s pretrial hearing – one of three before the trial begins. The judge will also consider whether television cameras should be allowed during the trial and which procedures will be used to question potential jurors. The Los Angeles Laker, who pleaded not guilty to the sexual assault charge, is scheduled to go on trial Aug. 27. Bryant, 25, said the two had consensual sex. The woman’s security has become a serous issue. She was 19 last year when she said Bryant raped her at a Vail-area resort where she worked. Since then she has received numerous threats, including one from an Iowa man who was sentenced on Friday to four months in a federal prison. Once, the woman’s name was mistakenly left in a filing published on the court’s Web site.

And last month, a court reporter inadvertently e-mailed transcripts from a closed hearing on the woman’s sexual history to seven media outlets. US District Judge Terry Ruckriegle told the media groups not to publish anything from the transcripts, prompting them to ask Colorado’s highest court to overturn the order. The high court has not ruled on the matter yet. “The worldwide publication of the victim’s name potentially jeopardised the victim’s safety and greatly contributed to her already existing fear for her own physical well-being,” attorney John Clune said in a recent filing.

But attorneys for media groups said there is intense interest in the case and the public would not have access to the court filings if they were only available in the Eagle County courthouse. Clune, the accuser’s attorney, said in his filing: “The court’s interest in protecting victim’s rights as well as personal safety must come before mere convenience to the media.”

According to the first amendment:
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

How far does this go? While the woman's privacy should be protected as much as possible, what about the people's right to know? When does it become ok to censor the media and tell them what they can and can't say? If they censor this, than what's next and if they don't, what does it mean for victim's rights? I'm glad I am not the judge making the decision here, its certainly a tough one.