> I know of no evidence in favor of the first point. Do you know of any case where a ratio higher than 10000x was ever tested? Because there have been several

> I know of no evidence in favor of the first point. Do you know of any case where a ratio higher than 10000x was ever tested? Because there have been several that were tossed out as disproportionate at a much lower ratio than that. > Your second point is patently false because TXO is about speech - it's literally a disparagement case. It was a case of negotiating in bad faith by slandering a title, and the damages were awarded on the basis that TXO had engaged in similar nefarious behavior across the country while negotiating other deals. That's substantially different in character from a series of unsavory opinion pieces, and within the realm of types of speech that we typically do regulate—it's more akin to fraud than it is to personal slander/libel. From the ruling: > [T]he record shows that this was not an isolated incident on TXO’s part—a mere excess of zeal by poorly supervised, low level employees—but rather part of a pattern and practice by TXO to defraud and coerce those in positions of unequal bargaining power.