I led with the spam hypothetical because I think it seems (from my perspective) to be inevitable and doesn't depend on us sharing the same (rather American) axioms around free speech.
It's not productive to get bogged down into technical minutiae about how you might and might not cope with examples of spam.
And it's not depending on us sharing those axioms, the point was to establish what the fundamental stance is on the point being debated. Presumably we're commenting on American courts, American laws, affecting Americans and an American corporation, so it seems like a good thing we're using a rather American frame of reference.
