Out of curiosity: I wonder whether there is civil liability for stuff like "Innocence of Muslims"

[DirkGently]

6. Not likely to succeed on that theory in America.

Insulting someone won't typically fly as the "cause" of a violent response. A sign reading, "Everyone in this building is mass-murdering rapist; please kill them all via the attached flamethrower" would be a different matter.

But did anything like that happen with the film in question? It does appear to have been a deliberate attempt to incite violence, and was accompanied by other acts, including lying about who made it and perhaps coordinating in its promotion and distribution to create the maximum possible chaos. There may have been other acts along the way that went beyond just the film itself and into the realm of overtly inciting violence that could be criminal or tortious. Some of those acts probably weren't committed by the filmmakers though.

The filmmaker falsely claimed to be an Israeli American, backed by Jewish Americans, presumably to inflame Muslim / Jewish tensions and anti-American sentiment as well. But who brought the film to the attention of Muslim clerics? Translated it into Arabic? Who kicked off the outrage precisely on Sept. 11? Who suggested the riots would be good cover for a coordinated extremist attack using military-grade weaponry?

It's great we've had this very theoretical debate here about the Heckler's Veto and free speech and the backward views of much of the Muslim world, but this film was also a deliberate ploy played out with great care and attention to detail,and it worked, to horrendous effect, to hurt a lot of people.