3 ms·
Yes, it was a truly chilling effect on the free speech when a website was held responsible for distributing private sex videos to garner clicks. If that suit d
by Erwin 9y ago
Yes, it was a truly chilling effect on the free speech when a website was held responsible for distributing private sex videos to garner clicks.
If that suit didn't happen, would reddit been as fast to stop the "fappening" exchange on their website?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ICloud_leaks_of_celebrity_photos https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ICloud_leaks_of_celebrity_phot...
At least if you are a celebrity with deep pockets you have a good chance of getting your leaked photos wiped.
You're out of luck however if you are just an ordinary person, and partner uploaded your pictures to some "amateur" website as "revenge porn".
- jedberg 9y agoI hate Gawker too, but you need to see the bigger picture. It was defending the suit, whether right or wrong, that killed them. The judgement was just the death blow. Would you feel the same way if the suit had been against a more reputable organization like the New York Times?
- AnimalMuppet 9y agoNumber 1, the New York Times wouldn't (I trust) have published the stuff that got Gawker in trouble. Number 2, the New York Times would be much wiser in how they interacted with the courts than Gawker was. Number 3, people do sue the New York Times. The New York Times pays the legal costs, and keeps publishing. Do you really think that a billionaire can bankrupt the New York Times with a lawsuit? I'm pretty sure they can't...