3 ms·

Let's not downplay it, the damages are reputational - not (necessarily) financial. They were falsely accused of engaging in criminal activity in the hopes of ge

Let's not downplay it, the damages are reputational - not (necessarily) financial. They were falsely accused of engaging in criminal activity in the hopes of getting their services provider to terminate their relationship with the author. This trend of hiding behind algorithms and percentage figures needs to stop, yesterday.

perihelions 3y ago
- "the damages are reputational" I don't see any tangible reputational damages here. No one seems to have read this except Digital Ocean (?) - "They were falsely accused of engaging in criminal activity" And Netcraft sincerely believed that this was a criminal-activity website. That is not libel! Untrue statements without malice (or a very severe amount of negligence) are not defamatory in the US. You are allowed to accuse people of things—that is protected speech.
- Sephr 3y ago
  > No one seems to have read this except Digital Ocean And that matters how? Digital Ocean read the complaint and acted on it, so the reputational damage occurred. You don't have to make a public article to damage someone's reputation privately.
  - perihelions 3y ago
    - "Digital Ocean read the complaint and acted on it, so the reputational damage occurred." How much damages is that, in your opinion? How much would OP need to paid to be made whole?