Elon Musk: Always A Douche

[The Minsky Moment]

Look I am not an attorney but based on my total layman's understanding:

1. I don't think its a conservative AGs job to force people to give Elon Musk money.

2. Also even if Media Matters is just lying its ass off, I don't see where the criminal fraud comes from. Maybe it is libel, but that is notoriously hard to prove.

3. Finally not just any AG can do this, they have to have jurisdiction.

But I am not a genius like Elon Musk so what do I know?

2 & 3 are basically right, but 1 is a political proposition, not a legal one. Not that long ago you'd be right but right now the job of any MAGA AG is to play a lead clown in the MAGA circus.

[grumbler]

Isn't it rather dangerous for the man who wrote Trump's speeches to remind everyone that fraud is a criminal offense?

[crazy canuck]

I suspect Jacob was making a joke.

And what was he making the joke about? Maybe something else posted in the thread? Maybe this:



I was also commenting on that.

I suspect he was making a joke about the post I made, and I now see JR made immediately before my post.

[Jacob]

I suspect Jacob was making a joke.

I was

... but the joke also sort of covered the fact that I don't know to what extent a compliant state AG could actually help Musk with his thermonuclear endeavours.

Though it's Monday morning. Has the suit been filed yet?

[Valmy]

I suspect he was making a joke about the post I made, and I now see JR made immediately before my post.

Well good for him. But I was making my post about the thing I quoted.

[The Minsky Moment]

Isn't it rather dangerous for the man who wrote Trump's speeches to remind everyone that fraud is a criminal offense?

He's probably safe, it's hard to defraud someone when everyone automatically assumes you are lying.

[The Minsky Moment]

I read the complaint filed against Media Matters.  Turns out Elon was right all along.  It is a thermonuclear lawsuit.  But for the opposite reason he intended.  It will probably not destroy X on its own, but it will very likely do an enormous amount of damage.  Assuming MM can generate the funding and legal support to ligigate it strongly, they are going to have a field day in discovery.

[HVC]

You think his lawyers warned him, or they were just blinded by the dollar signs in their eyes?

[Sheilbh]

You think his lawyers warned him, or they were just blinded by the dollar signs in their eyes?

I think he's using lawyers to force a non-profit media company to spend their money on litigation, even if it's just defending or getting things kicked out. That's what the powerful do if they have legal avenues available (and is part of the in-built inequality of law).

It is different, but I think tech billionaires look at Thiel and Gawker as a great example/model.

[HVC]

You think his lawyers warned him, or they were just blinded by the dollar signs in their eyes?

I think he's using lawyers to force a non-profit media company to spend their money on litigation, even if it's just defending or getting things kicked out. That's what the powerful do if they have legal avenues available (and is part of the in-built inequality of law).

It is different, but I think tech billionaires look at Thiel and Gawker as a great example/model.

 I mean Thiel might be a dick, but gawker as a whole was hardly blameless.

As an aside, jezebel finally went tits up. There goes my go to hate read site.

[Sheilbh]

No doubt - but the rich have always used law as a weapon against the media. I think that just opened up a new range of possibilities especially with the current trend (which is really positive from a media freedom perspective) of non-profits and specialist online media - they're more vulnerable to lawfare and you can even bankrupt them. Especially if you're rich enough to have no incentive to settle/push for your day in court.

[HVC]

Are there limits anti SLAPP awards/penalties? I mean is the risk reward still on the rich guys side?

[Sheilbh]

I think it's more that risk/reward doesn't necessarily matter if you're a billionaire v if you're a commercial or non-profit enterprise, particularly without the deep(-ish) pockets of the established traditional media companies.

If you're a billionaire and motivated, you can take the costs of fighting 100 losing lawsuits. Some anti-SLAPP laws allow recovery of costs, but not all. The cost of successfully fighting 100 lawsuits can be pretty hefty for a small media company or non-profit. Even if they are able to recover all their costs (or have pro bono support) and they're not paying those as they go it's a still a lot of time and energy by reporters, editors etc to fight litigatiton.

That's where it has more of a chilling effect almost aside from the actual law, especially as rich people can open up a million and one fronts. Agree on Gawker but that was an example of Thiel looking for and funding other claims which is an option too.

[The Minsky Moment]

Some initial reactions to the suit - copy here - https://s3.documentcloud.org/documents/24172816/x-v-media-matters-complaint.pdf

1.  The lead attorney is an appeal specialist.  If he has trial experience, it is not listed on his resume or firm area of practice. Of the remaining two lawyers, one is also an appellate specialist; the other did a few years general litigation in the Texas AG office after 1-2 years doing commercial litigation as a junior associate.  This is a team of political lawyers who know their way around a Federalist Society symposium but are very light on trial experience.

2. It doesn't look like the court where they brought the suit has jurisdiction.  They don't allege any of the defendants had any contacts with Texas.  it may be the strategy here is to make headlines with an initial filing and then die quietly on a motion to dismiss for lack of jurisdiction.

3. They ADMIT the existence of very problem they attack MM for writing about.  They try to minimize it by throwing a lot of metaphorical adjectives like "manufactured" or "inorganic". They claim it is "rare". Another way of saying the exact same thing is "it happens".  Its very odd to bring a disparagement case accusing the defendant of lying while admitting the truth of that very thing.

4. The crux of the complaint is that MM was able to generate their copy by refreshing, thereby "generating between 13 and 15 times more advertisements per hour than viewed by the average X user" (the bolding is in the original)  I don't think they realize how bad this looks for X.  The platform must have billions of views per day.  The Nazi/white nationalist feed alone are probably in the millions.  Divide that by 15 and it is a very scary number for an advertiser.

5.  The complaint directly and explicitly puts into issue the safety of the X platform, how much racist and Nazi ideology is on the platform and its rate of growth, how many big co ads "organically" appear next to such content, what that platform's advertising strategy is, its relationships with big advertisers, its revenues, etc.  In short there is a host of information about which MM is undoubtedly very interested, and now as part of civil discovery, they will be able to get to see some the innermost documents of the company on these subjects.  True there are confidentiality orders that restrict use of such materials, but the Fox-Dominion suit shows how ineffective those measures can be are as the case gets closer to trial.

It's amateur hour, except that the amateurs are indeed handling nuclear materials

Time to pop the popcorn and pull up a chair.

[The Minsky Moment]

Are there limits anti SLAPP awards/penalties? I mean is the risk reward still on the rich guys side?

If it stays in federal court in Texas, it won't be an issue because the Texas anti-slapp law does not apply in federal court.  I don't think this complaint is sanctionable either.  It's just a terrible idea to bring.