-
Ever wanted an RSS feed of all your favorite gaming news sites? Go check out our new Gaming Headlines feed! Read more about it here.
-
We have made minor adjustments to how the search bar works on ResetEra. You can read about the changes here.
Elon Musk wins Twitter defamation trial brought by caver Vernon Unsworth
- Thread starter Deleted member 43084
- Start date
Musk you fucking idiot. Did you at least apologize to the man? Maybe offer him a sum of money for all the shit you've given him? Or is acting like an adult too much to ask?
Musk is going to call him a child eating cannibal tomorrow, don't worry.
Can get soup that's far less salty now. Sounds like a win.
So you can say whatever you want about anyone as long as you don't bother to look up the truth before hand?
This guy Unsworth's lawyer (or his client) F'ed up. The jury sat through two days of testimony about this case and the dude asked for almost $200 million dollars. It was a jury trial; this guy played his hand like a fool.
Edit: never been on musk's side of this case but damn this shouldn't have played out this way.
Edit: never been on musk's side of this case but damn this shouldn't have played out this way.
I can see this actually. From my studies at media college there were media law courses which explained the difference. I think defamation is more than just hurling an insult. You have to be sharing the info as bonifide fact and you have to prove that the statement actually had some sort of monetary impact on the receiving party.
I can say McDonalds burgers are full of shit or I can release an expose where I claim McDonalds burgers are literally full of shit and people take note and avoid McDonalds.
Not really an elegant way to get the point across but hopefully that kinda makes sense. It'ss also been kinda awhile since I did that course and I'm sure Scottish defamation laws are a little different than others.
Still a shitty thing to do though. Shouldn't be smiling for taken all the way to court for being a juvenile jackass even if he got away with it.
I can say McDonalds burgers are full of shit or I can release an expose where I claim McDonalds burgers are literally full of shit and people take note and avoid McDonalds.
Not really an elegant way to get the point across but hopefully that kinda makes sense. It'ss also been kinda awhile since I did that course and I'm sure Scottish defamation laws are a little different than others.
Still a shitty thing to do though. Shouldn't be smiling for taken all the way to court for being a juvenile jackass even if he got away with it.
"he couldn't possibly have known that he's not a pedo so it's just a silly mistake! no worriez elon sama"
This is it, which is why the law ruled how it did.
However, what has to be taken into account in the current socially connected world we live in is the power dynamics of someone like Musk calling you a pedo, and that making you "famous" versus thousands of angry Twitter profiles now @ing Musk calling him a pedo.
His public figure is known well-enough for probable doubt that he is actually a pedo because random people call him it. Someone who isn't famous and isn't known getting called a pedo by a famous person leads to those who hear it having "credibility" to assume said person may well be a paedophile.
I believe even more so if it comes from an individual and not a media outlet.
User Banned (3 Days): Trolling, drive by, prior warnings for similar behavior
People in this thread are even saltier than that soup.
Wait, so the jury thought there was at least a 50% chance that Musk had actively checked to see if this random guy he knew nothing about was, in fact, a pedophile?
There's no way I'm reading that excerpt from the article right, surely? Like, if the standard were "actual malice," or "recklessness" + "beyond reasonable doubt", but "preponderance of evidence" + "recklessness" sounds like a super easy bar to clear.
There's no way I'm reading that excerpt from the article right, surely? Like, if the standard were "actual malice," or "recklessness" + "beyond reasonable doubt", but "preponderance of evidence" + "recklessness" sounds like a super easy bar to clear.