I'm still quite frustrated that this did not get more attention when it happened. It was a clear case of a company using the law to suppress speech, and it went off without a hitch..

] In the end, Blackboard was able to use the law to ban two
] students from speaking at a conference, conducting
] security research and publicly criticizing its product.
] As long as such efforts prove effective, other
] individuals and corporations will continue to misuse the
] law in order to censor speech and other legitimate
] activities. Those concerned with chilling effects should
] take note.

A concise effective description that has my seal of approval. It is factually correct and a vast majority of the insinuations made are also true. A significantly better description and analysis than anything else I've seen written on the issue.

] Cease and desist letters can make such spurious claims
] and overreaching demands because they are not official
] legal filings and there has been, as yet, little
] accountability for their abuses. Even though recipients
] may have the legal right to engage in the threatened
] activity (in this case the facilitation of free speech),
] those without specialized legal expertise and a solid
] defense fund most non-corporate recipients
] may simply comply with the letter's demands out of
] fear, uncertainty and lack of resources. The Interz0ne
] conference organizers hardly had the time to even react
] to their cease and desist letter, which Blackboard sent
] on the eve of the students scheduled presentation.

A very good analysis. Again, I believe that knowingly sending overboard cease and desist letters should be a crime bearing significant punitive liability. Wealthy entities will continue to chill speech in their interests until this is resolved.