https://www.cbc.ca/news/world/dominion-voting-fox-news-trial-1.6813876
Trial is set to start today after having been delayed by 24 hours yesterday.
There have been highly embarrassing releases of discovery coming out of this case, like how Tucker Carlson hates Donald Trump in private, or basically how Fox knew that somew of the stories they were putting out there were crap, but that's what their audience wanted.
What I don't get is this though - at the end of the day it's a defamation case - so it's about damage to reputation. Dominion Voting Systems is not a large company. It's privatey held so impossible to get an exact value on it, but I see it has 100-200 employees, one estimate has its annual revenue (not profit - revenue) at $17.5 million. And while I have no problem believing that Dominion's reputation was damaged in 2020, by the revelations from this case alone you have to think a lot of that damage has been ameliorated.
So while Dominion (to my eyes) should almost certainly be compensated, the $1.6 billion ask seems wildly inappropriate. This does appear like they're trying to pull a Gawker / Hulk Hogan / Peter Thiel move where the intent is to just try and cause as much damage to Fox as possible.
And finally - the trial judge has already made rulings that can and likely will be appealed. What happens if this case makes it to a 6-3 divided Supreme Court? :ph34r:
Does increased threat level against owners and employees mean anything in these things?
Punitive damages?
Quote from: Gups on April 18, 2023, 01:02:21 PMPunitive damages?
Yeah. And I understand that the US is much more willing to impose punitive damages than Canada is.
But still - I think of punitive damages as being like 3x. The damages being sought here seem like orders of magnitude more than the actual financial loss experienced by Dominion.
I think that Dominion went into this asking for the maximum that could be even thinly justified, both to pressure Fox for a settlement, and to give the jury some leeway to reduce the amount of the judgement if that would be necessary to get some jurors to find for Dominion. None of the $1.6B is for punitive damages; Dominion simply asked for punitive damages in the amount that the jury decided on (if I am reading the coverage correctly).
Quote from: grumbler on April 18, 2023, 01:18:07 PMI think that Dominion went into this asking for the maximum that could be even thinly justified, both to pressure Fox for a settlement, and to give the jury some leeway to reduce the amount of the judgement if that would be necessary to get some jurors to find for Dominion. None of the $1.6B is for punitive damages; Dominion simply asked for punitive damages in the amount that the jury decided on (if I am reading the coverage correctly).
Yeah, the heads of damage making the 1.6B are related to loss of profits, loss of enterprise value and other sundry expenses, such as the security they had to hire to keep their operations safe from the Maga maniacs. The punitive damages in this case could be considerable if it turns out the Fox talking heads knew the claims they were making on air were false. But, as you say, that is not part of the 1.6 figure.
Quote from: Barrister on April 18, 2023, 01:04:47 PMQuote from: Gups on April 18, 2023, 01:02:21 PMPunitive damages?
Yeah. And I understand that the US is much more willing to impose punitive damages than Canada is.
But still - I think of punitive damages as being like 3x. The damages being sought here seem like orders of magnitude more than the actual financial loss experienced by Dominion.
Actual loss of profits is a very small part of the claim, the losses being claimed are into the future. Not simply what has been suffered to date.
Fox News doesn't even need to lose the lawsuit now, the revelations have been damaging enough.
Quote from: Razgovory on April 18, 2023, 01:35:01 PMFox News doesn't even need to lose the lawsuit now, the revelations have been damaging enough.
I don't know about that. I heard a report today saying their viewership has not decreased.
Quote from: crazy canuck on April 18, 2023, 01:37:17 PMQuote from: Razgovory on April 18, 2023, 01:35:01 PMFox News doesn't even need to lose the lawsuit now, the revelations have been damaging enough.
I don't know about that. I heard a report today saying their viewership has not decreased.
Yeah their 70+ age demographic don't care about that kind of thing.
In any case kind of surprised Fox wouldn't know just making up fake attacks on people and institutions will get them sued and for potentially a lot. Seems like the kind of liability knowledge that a big corporate news agency would know about.
And it has settled. 787.5 million
Fox seems to have settled for $787.5 million. :lol:
A very expensive fake story Fox. I hope it was worth it.
Net income for fox news in 2022 was $1.507B. So this hurts but is hardly crippling.
The crazy claims against Dominion basically killed their ability to get contracts in the US So they can claim as damages all lost future profits that they reasonably could have earned.
The Supreme Court is (was) not likely to be much of a factor because defamation is a state law issue. The Court would only get involved to the extent the trial judge made a ruling that was fundamentally at odds with the First Amendment.
That said, it's clear that Dominion's strongest leverage point was the in terrorem effect of a threatened public trial.
Quote from: HVC on April 18, 2023, 04:50:09 PMNet income for fox news in 2022 was $1.507B. So this hurts but is hardly crippling.
Well I think the idea is for it to hurt bad enough that they don't do it again.
I can't emphasize enough: (a) how hard it is to win a defamation suit against a media company is US courts, and (b) the extraordinary, perfect storm set of bad facts for Fox that nonetheless led to this result. It's like a perfect case study in how badly a media company can screw up its editorial and legal risk management functions.
Quote from: Valmy on April 18, 2023, 05:38:47 PMQuote from: HVC on April 18, 2023, 04:50:09 PMNet income for fox news in 2022 was $1.507B. So this hurts but is hardly crippling.
Well I think the idea is for it to hurt bad enough that they don't do it again.
2022 was a bad year. They made 2 billion the year before. So that can still mess up once a year and make 1 billion net income :D they have 5 billion in cash laying around :ph34r:
Question. a plea means they don't admit wrong doing, right? Can they face any other repercussions ? FCC or anything?
Quote from: HVC on April 18, 2023, 05:45:40 PM2022 was a bad year. They made 2 billion the year before. So that can still mess up once a year and make 1 billion net income :D they have 5 billion in cash laying around :ph34r:
Question. a plea means they don't admit wrong doing, right? Can they face any other repercussions ? FCC or anything?
This was a civil suit, so settlement doesn't necessarily mean admitting that Fox was wrong, but Dominion was saying as recently as yesterday that any settlement had to include an apology from Fox.
They're being sued by another voting machine company "smartmatic" for 2.7 billion in damages, I assume they're going to want at least as big a payout.
Hell, if I was them, I would demand 49% of my claimed damages as well. That would be 1.323 billion.
Quote from: grumbler on April 18, 2023, 05:59:26 PMQuote from: HVC on April 18, 2023, 05:45:40 PM2022 was a bad year. They made 2 billion the year before. So that can still mess up once a year and make 1 billion net income :D they have 5 billion in cash laying around :ph34r:
Question. a plea means they don't admit wrong doing, right? Can they face any other repercussions ? FCC or anything?
What I saw was that Fox didn't admit to doing wrong, didn't apologize, but admitted the judge's findings that they had spread lies.
This was a civil suit, so settlement doesn't necessarily mean admitting that Fox was wrong, but Dominion was saying as recently as yesterday that any settlement had to include an apology from Fox.
Quote from: Barrister on April 18, 2023, 08:32:16 PMQuote from: grumbler on April 18, 2023, 05:59:26 PMQuote from: HVC on April 18, 2023, 05:45:40 PM2022 was a bad year. They made 2 billion the year before. So that can still mess up once a year and make 1 billion net income :D they have 5 billion in cash laying around :ph34r:
Question. a plea means they don't admit wrong doing, right? Can they face any other repercussions ? FCC or anything?
What I saw was that Fox didn't admit to doing wrong, didn't apologize, but admitted the judge's findings that they had spread lies.
This was a civil suit, so settlement doesn't necessarily mean admitting that Fox was wrong, but Dominion was saying as recently as yesterday that any settlement had to include an apology from Fox.
Quote from: Habbaku on April 18, 2023, 10:14:50 PMQuote from: Barrister on April 18, 2023, 08:32:16 PMQuote from: grumbler on April 18, 2023, 05:59:26 PMQuote from: HVC on April 18, 2023, 05:45:40 PM2022 was a bad year. They made 2 billion the year before. So that can still mess up once a year and make 1 billion net income :D they have 5 billion in cash laying around :ph34r:
Question. a plea means they don't admit wrong doing, right? Can they face any other repercussions ? FCC or anything?
What I saw was that Fox didn't admit to doing wrong, didn't apologize, but admitted the judge's findings that they had spread lies.
This was a civil suit, so settlement doesn't necessarily mean admitting that Fox was wrong, but Dominion was saying as recently as yesterday that any settlement had to include an apology from Fox.
I am now so confused about who said what.
Quote from: Valmy on April 19, 2023, 09:39:53 AMI am now so confused about who said what.
So is Fox
Leaving out any quotes...
Fox News did not apologize. They did not retract anything.
They acknowledged the judge's findings of fact that they had spread untruths on the air.
It was the kind of formulation only a lawyer could love.
Normally you'd expect either Fox to apologize and retract, or otherwise pay but continue to deny any wrongdoing. But this is really a "cut the baby in half" kind of formulation.
As Jimmy points out, the Smartmatic suit is still pending. So Fox has to be very careful about making statements that could be used as admissions against it in that lawsuit. No doubt that upped the price tag on this settlement.
Quote from: The Minsky Moment on April 19, 2023, 12:37:28 PMAs Jimmy points out, the Smartmatic suit is still pending. So Fox has to be very careful about making statements that could be used as admissions against it in that lawsuit. No doubt that upped the price tag on this settlement.
Understood, but that's where I might have expected the "although Fox News continues to deny any wrongdoing, we have nevertheless settled this lawsuit" kind of statement.
Someone at Dominion insisted on the "acknowledgement".
Quote from: Barrister on April 19, 2023, 01:08:05 PMQuote from: The Minsky Moment on April 19, 2023, 12:37:28 PMAs Jimmy points out, the Smartmatic suit is still pending. So Fox has to be very careful about making statements that could be used as admissions against it in that lawsuit. No doubt that upped the price tag on this settlement.
Understood, but that's where I might have expected the "although Fox News continues to deny any wrongdoing, we have nevertheless settled this lawsuit" kind of statement.
Someone at Dominion insisted on the "acknowledgement".
I am not sure what your point is, what the judge already found as a fact in rulings on preliminary applications is not something that can be denied in a settlement agreement.
The Case That Could Be Fox's Next Dominion (https://www.nytimes.com/2023/07/10/business/media/fox-news-defamation-ray-epps-tucker-carlson.html?utm_source=pocket-newtab)
Tucker Carlson, before he was sidelined by Fox, repeatedly endorsed a conspiracy theory about an Arizona man, who may sue for defamation. Legal experts say it would be a viable case. QuoteOf all the distortions and paranoia that Tucker Carlson promoted on his since-canceled Fox News program, one looms large: a conspiracy theory that an Arizona man working as a covert government agent incited the Jan. 6, 2021, assault on the Capitol to sabotage and discredit former President Donald J. Trump and his political movement.
What's known about the man — a two-time Trump voter named Ray Epps — is that he took part in demonstrations in Washington that day and the night before. He was captured on camera urging a crowd to march with him and enter the Capitol. But at other points, he pleads for calm once it becomes clear the situation is turning violent. He can be seen moving past a line of Capitol Police at the barricades, but never actually goes inside the Capitol.
Federal prosecutors have not charged Mr. Epps with a crime, focusing instead on the more than 1,000 other demonstrators who acted violently or were trespassing in the Capitol. The Justice Department's sprawling investigation into the attack remains open, however, and Mr. Epps could still be indicted.
Yet for more than 18 months, Mr. Carlson insisted that the lack of charges against Mr. Epps could mean only one thing: that he was being protected because he was a secret government agent. There was "no rational explanation," Mr. Carlson told his audience, why this "mysterious figure" who "helped stage-manage the insurrection" had not been charged.
He repeated Mr. Epps's name over and over — in nearly 20 episodes — imprinting it on the minds of his viewers.
Mr. Epps was in the Marine Corps but said in his deposition before the Jan. 6 committee that he had otherwise never worked on behalf of any government agency. He and his wife, Robyn, have fled Arizona and are in hiding in another state, having sold their wedding venue business and ranch after receiving death threats from people who appeared to believe the conspiracy theory. And his legal jeopardy is far from over given that prosecutors are still unsealing new cases in connection with Jan. 6.
Now lawyers representing Mr. Epps and his wife are proceeding with plans to sue Fox News for defamation. "We informed Fox in March that if they did not issue a formal on-air apology that we would pursue all available avenues to protect the Eppses' rights," said Michael Teter, a lawyer for Mr. Epps who sent the network a cease-and-desist letter asking for an on-air apology and a retraction. After Mr. Teter did not hear from Fox about his request, he began to prepare the suit. "That remains our intent."
Mr. Epps declined to comment on his potential suit. A Fox News spokeswoman declined to comment.
Mr. Carlson also declined to comment. But he continues to push the false notion that the Jan. 6 attack was staged by anti-Trump elements inside the government. On a podcast last week, Mr. Carlson claimed that the riot "was not an insurrection" and that the crowd that day was "filled with federal agents."
First Amendment experts say Mr. Epps has a viable case for defamation — one reminiscent of the lawsuit the network recently settled with Dominion Voting Systems for $787.5 million, a case centered on numerous examples of false statements made on Fox News programs over an extended period.
[...]
Fox gave up the defence of the Dominion case because of the significant evidence Fox presenters knew that what they were saying was false.
It will be interesting to see if the same thing occurs with the Carlsen conspiracy theories about Jan. 6. If there is evidence he knew he was spouting lies, that would likely do much good for the US as a whole.