On Fri, May 09, 2003 at 11:43:52AM -0500, Branden Robinson wrote: > (a) [...] Commercial speech that is not false or deceptive and does not > concern unlawful activities may be restricted only in the service of a > substantial governmental interest, and only through means that directly > advance that interest."
I would not be surprised to have a court hold that "restricted" in this instance applies solely to government restrictions, and that contractual restrictions (such as agreeing to a license) are still permissible, since nobody forced the company to agree to that restriction. Using the broader interpretation, you would find, for instance, that NDAs are unenforcable. -- John