1. Forum
  2. Usenet
  3. MISC.NEWS.INTERNET.DISCUS

  • a "free speech absolutist"

    From JAB@21:1/5 to All on Mon Mar 25 21:04:22 2024
    Lawsuit by Elon Musk's X was an attempt to punish free speech, judge
    rules

    A US judge threw out a suit X filed, saying it was about
    "punishing the defendants for their speech."

    It had sought millions in damages from a research group that found
    a rise in hate speech on X.

    X CEO Elon Musk has said a similar "thermonuclear" lawsuit is
    about "protecting free speech."
    ...
    ...
    In its complaint, filed in the Northern District of California, X
    argued that the nonprofit Center for Countering Digital Hate violated
    the platform's terms of service in gathering data for reports that
    documented a significant increase in hate speech on X following Musk's takeover.

    The company claimed the CCDH was responsible for "tens of millions of
    dollars" in damages due to lost advertising revenue and the expense of
    internal investigations.

    But Breyer wrote "there can be no mistaking" that the real motive of
    the suit was to bully X's critics into silence.

    The decision cited a survey that found "social media researchers have
    canceled, suspended or changed more than 100 studies about X" as a
    result of Musk's policies as CEO.


    https://www.businessinsider.com/judge-throws-out-hate-speech-lawsuit-elon-musk-x-2024-3

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Anonymous@21:1/5 to JAB on Tue Mar 26 22:13:25 2024
    JAB wrote:
    Lawsuit by Elon Musk's X was an attempt to punish free speech, judge
    rules

    A US judge threw out a suit X filed, saying it was about
    "punishing the defendants for their speech."

    It had sought millions in damages from a research group that found
    a rise in hate speech on X.

    X CEO Elon Musk has said a similar "thermonuclear" lawsuit is
    about "protecting free speech."
    ...
    ...
    In its complaint, filed in the Northern District of California, X
    argued that the nonprofit Center for Countering Digital Hate violated
    the platform's terms of service in gathering data for reports that
    documented a significant increase in hate speech on X following Musk's takeover.

    The company claimed the CCDH was responsible for "tens of millions of dollars" in damages due to lost advertising revenue and the expense of internal investigations.

    But Breyer wrote "there can be no mistaking" that the real motive of
    the suit was to bully X's critics into silence.

    The decision cited a survey that found "social media researchers have canceled, suspended or changed more than 100 studies about X" as a
    result of Musk's policies as CEO.


    https://www.businessinsider.com/judge-throws-out-hate-speech-lawsuit-elon-musk-x-2024-3

    Says (((Breyer))) the filthy Jewdge.

    Musk should have made clear that the "Center for Countering Digital Hate", which, in my opinion, should have their offices shot up, was being sued for tortious interference.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From JAB@21:1/5 to Anonymous on Tue Mar 26 22:16:36 2024
    On Tue, 26 Mar 2024 22:13:25 -0400, Anonymous <anon@anon.net> wrote:

    tortious interference.

    "Tortious interference is a common law tort allowing a claim for
    damages against a defendant who wrongfully interferes with the
    plaintiff's contractual or business relationships."

    A "free speech absolutist" is without standing to bring such a case.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)