- - - 
 I hate to make use of an appeal to authority here (and I don't even begin to have a handle on wikipedia norms, so I apologize for any foot-treading), but I'm a civil rights lawyer, graduate of one of the top 3 law schools in the country, I'm a regular First Amendment practitioner and have written on the subject, I'm the person who added the text re: the Noerr-Pennington doctrine and tweaked the defamation information in this entry... and I've never heard of any "virtual First Amendment."  In fact, it's kind of a stupid idea.  Taken to its logical extreme, every law would have a "virtual" version to the extent it's ambiguous and gets interpreted by the courts.  The virtual ERISA!  Yea... right.  That stuff should be kept out.  If you want to learn more about ambiguity and constitutional interpretation, see (Stanford law school prof. and genius) Larry Lessig's book, "Code and other Laws of Cyberspace"  it discusses latent ambiguities and constitutional translation, and is available free on a wiki of its own at codebook.jot.com.  (Sorry, I'm not sure how to put a link in wikicode.)