<P> Threats of violence that are directed at a person or group of persons that has the intent of placing the target at risk of bodily harm or death are generally unprotected . However, there are several exceptions . For example, the Supreme Court has held that "threats may not be punished if a reasonable person would understand them as obvious hyperbole", he writes . Additionally, threats of "social ostracism" and of "politically motivated boycotts" are constitutionally protected . However, sometimes even political speech can be a threat, and thus becomes unprotected . </P> <P> Another class of permissible restrictions on speech is based on intellectual property rights . Things like copyrights or trademarks fall under this exception . The Supreme Court first held this in Harper & Row v. Nation Enterprises (1985), where copyright law was upheld against a First Amendment free speech challenge . Also, broadcasting rights for shows are not an infringement of free speech rights . The Court has upheld such restrictions as an incentive for artists in the' speech marketplace' . </P> <P> Commercial speech occupies a unique role as a free speech exception . While there is no complete exception, legal advocates recognize it as having "diminished protection". For example, false advertising can be punished and misleading advertising may be prohibited . Commercial advertising may be restricted in ways that other speech can't if a substantial governmental interest is advanced, and that restriction supports that interest as well as not being overly broad . This doctrine of limited protection for advertisements is due to a balancing inherent in the policy explanations for the rule, namely that other types of speech (for example, political) are much more important . </P> <P> The government is not permitted to fire an employee based on the employee's speech if either the speech is on a matter of public concern, the speech is not said as part of that employee's job duties, or the damage caused by the speech is outweighed by the value of the speech to the employee and public . Specifically, speech is "treated as a matter of public concern" by reference to the "content, form, and context of a given statement". The exception with regards to balancing the harm of a statement and the value of the statement (the Pickering test) is done by considering the degree to which the speech either interferes with close working relationships, disrupts the office, or even has the potential to do either . </P>

When is the freedom of speech not protected