3 ms·
I'll say it again, this argument is a total straw man. Of course it's ridiculous that someone wants to compel someone else to contract with them and pay them. S
by big-green-man 2y ago
I'll say it again, this argument is a total straw man. Of course it's ridiculous that someone wants to compel someone else to contract with them and pay them. So ridiculous in fact, that if you believe this is what's going on you should rethink it.
This lawsuit is about a cartel arrangement to hurt a company in retaliation because of it's moderation policy. I don't think it's a strong case, but there is a case to be made, and I'm eager to see how it plays out in court.
- jfengel 2y agoIt seems like a flaw that sufficiently wealthy people can use the courts to harass their opponents no matter how weak the case. There's literally no downside. All it costs is money and he's got hundreds of billions.
- big-green-man 2y agoYeah I agree with you. Even if youre right and it's plainly obvious, a lawsuit can destroy your life. The chilling effect is probably costing our society quite a bit.
- rsynnott 2y agoI really think there should be some sort of limit on these. Lose enough of them (this is not his first rodeo) and you have to front all the costs for both sides if you want to be allowed to sue.
- Marsymars 2y agoI don't think that's sufficient to limit these. To limit them, frivolous lawsuits need punitive damages that eliminate the ability of the frivolous party to keep filing them - then, the risks would be symmetric between the parties.