Has Slashdot violated copyright law?

Copyrights were established, in part, to protect writers from unfair plagiarism of their work. It seems now it’s being used to silence dissenting voices.

Commander Taco relates the tale of the first time Slashdot has been told to remove content from their site due to illegal use of copyrighted material by an anonymous reader. The Church of Scientology cited the DMCA and demanded that the post be removed. Slashdot’s lawyers advised that they comply with the request. So will this become a new weapon in the hands of those who can’t stand the light of publicity? Is the Church of Scientology simply defending their copyrighted material, or have they discovered a way to eliminate negative public comment? How soon will it be before candidates for office use the same tactics to stop opposing groups from posting quotes or images that fail to flatter the politicians? Where in all this is “fair use” and “public domain?” Is this the beginning of the end for free speech, or simply another misapplication of the law that will eventually be corrected by the courts?