Political speech is just that — even if in MySpace, an Indiana court ruled today.Odd. Why would there be any First Amendment test just because it is speech on MySpace?From the Associated Press report: The three-judge panel on Monday ordered the Putnam Circuit Court to set aside its penalty against the girl, referred to only as A.B. in court records. “While we have little regard for A.B.’s use of vulgar epithets, we conclude that her overall message constitutes political speech,” Judge Patricia Riley wrote in the 10-page opinion.This makes me wonder, if newspaper publishers do not understand online, do judges? In other words, how could the earlier judge have made such an obviously wrong (unconstitutional) decision? And given so, what would happen if the same thing occurred with text messages (SMS) or viral video, sent to all the schoolkids’ cell phones?Is this just an example of technology ahead of the courts, or a judge who does not understand free speech rules? Talk back to me, below. Technology Industry