3 ms·

Because you don't understand how anything works. Fox vs Dominion was not a criminal case, nor was the government involved. It was two private parties and one p

Because you don't understand how anything works. Fox vs Dominion was not a criminal case, nor was the government involved. It was two private parties and one party (Dominion) was claiming $2 billion in damage to their business from defamation. The government doesn't do anything here other than a judge preceding over the case. Dominion can even bring up business records, sales forecast and more to back up their damages claims. Ultimately Fox settled because they feared things from discovery going public and Dominion having a strong case against them. There was not even a judge involved in the settlement. It's the two private parties agreeing to end the lawsuit in exchange for terms, in this case payment. Meanwhile with the Seagate case, this is in criminal territory, the government would be prosecuting the company directly but also has laws that defines the existence of fines and the size of the fines.

elmerfud 4y ago
I understand perfectly. Defamation doesn't have to have damages to get an award, you only need to show that it occurred. Based on dominion's financials the don't appear to be impacted financially nor in the eyes of the public either. What you're failing to understand is that things like this are very muchn out of balance. I'm not saying fox should be less, I'm saying those knowingly in violation of national security export restrictions should be punished more. There's a big difference between "you said lies about me" and "I sold equipment to our enemies". That you missed that point is sad.
- yamazakiwi 4y ago
  It's difficult to convincingly argue which of the two occurrences is more damaging. It is easy, however, to reduce one of those occurrences you view as less damaging into "You said lies about me", to promote your narrative.
- COGlory 4y ago
  Fox settled - it could have gone to court and Fox could have won. It's not like the government had much say in the amount which Fox settled for. Fox paying $750 million was their own decision.

elmerfud 4y ago

I understand perfectly. Defamation doesn't have to have damages to get an award, you only need to show that it occurred. Based on dominion's financials the don't appear to be impacted financially nor in the eyes of the public either. What you're failing to understand is that things like this are very muchn out of balance. I'm not saying fox should be less, I'm saying those knowingly in violation of national security export restrictions should be punished more. There's a big difference between "you said lies about me" and "I sold equipment to our enemies". That you missed that point is sad.

yamazakiwi 4y ago
It's difficult to convincingly argue which of the two occurrences is more damaging. It is easy, however, to reduce one of those occurrences you view as less damaging into "You said lies about me", to promote your narrative.
COGlory 4y ago
Fox settled - it could have gone to court and Fox could have won. It's not like the government had much say in the amount which Fox settled for. Fox paying $750 million was their own decision.