3 ms·
Sam didn't "win" the case in the sense that most people will think of when reading this headline. In the 20th paragraph of the linked article, finally getting
by vlucas 4mo ago
Sam didn't "win" the case in the sense that most people will think of when reading this headline.
In the 20th paragraph of the linked article, finally getting to the actual reason:
> On Monday, the jury took only two hours to reach its verdict. Musk’s complaint, the panel found, had indeed exceeded the statute of limitations
Musk is appealing. This fight is far from over.
- nashashmi 4mo agoLawsuit filed in 2024. Too late for it. AI boomed in 2023. And elon exited in 2021. I hate to say it but Elon lost. And we all lost.
- epistasis 4mo agoThis case should have never made it to a jury, there is no case here. The judge was cowed by Musk's fame to even bring this to trial, I think. It's an example of how the justice system works differently for this with more wealth and power. There is no case, just massive ego from a person with massive wealth.
- kryptiskt 4mo agoThat Musk couldn't even get over the first stumbling block which is the statute of limitations, does not make the win any lesser. It makes it more decisive, since Musk now has to overcome that hurdle before even having a shot at the meat of the case.
- ScoobleDoodle 4mo agoI think parent probably means winning on merit or a sense of justice. As in won for a deserved reason rather than a technicality. The technicality here is exceeded the statute of limitations. A win in any manner isn’t landing the same for observers as winning for a just reason.
- epistasis 4mo agoThere is no "sense of justice" that will sway an appeal, it's all about the law. And this jury just found that there was zero merit under law. Appeals are for finding legal technicalities or edge cases. They do not overturn findings of fact from a jury. That is, it used to be that way in the US, when the courts were ruled by law. In the modern US, the Supreme Court is a partisan political body, so perhaps people are confident it will get overturned because Musk is now political enough for the Supreme Court to give Musk personal favors for all his massive political contributions. That sort of rank corruption is the only reason to be confident that Musk could ever win this silly case.
- zozbot234 4mo agoJuries issue findings of fact, they don't issue rulings about the law. The issue of whether the statute of limitations applies to any given factual situation is one of law.
- ScoobleDoodle 4mo agoI'm clarifying and drawing the distinction related to the following because the responder wasn't responding to what was meant, but what they heard: > Sam didn't "win" the case in the sense that most people will think of when reading this headline. There are 2 senses of "win" here. You're talking about the "win" (A) where it is achieving victory regardless of reason. The second type of "win" (B) that is being called out in quotes is one based either on the merits of the law (verses a technicality) or a sense of justice. I'm not highlight the first sense of win (A) which parent of my comment and you seem to be talking about I'm pointing out grandparent is talking about (B).
- dathinab 4mo agoor it is pretty much over before it even began, because he sued way too late...
- tim333 4mo agoEven if they hadn't had the statute of limitations it wasn't much of a case. Musk grumpy that Altman set up a for profit subsidiary of OpenAI whereas Musk wanted Misk to set up a for profit subsidiary, or maybe make it all for profit. I mean is there even a case there?
- lokar 4mo agoWhat is the substance of the appeal? IANAL, but AIUI, it's pretty hard to appeal a finding of fact from a jury.
- zozbot234 4mo agoThe substantive point of law will most likely be that OpenAI's salami slicing tactic for becoming a for-profit does not properly fall under the statute of limitations. To think otherwise is basically no different than arguing that you can rob a person twice and not be prosecuted for the second robbery because of "double jeopardy".
- lokar 4mo agoSo, the illegal activity continued, so the clock did not start?
- Tangurena2 4mo agoThe word used will be toll. Basically the clock measuring the statute of limitations can be stopped/paused for certain things. It could be that the victim was under the age of 18 and therefore couldn't sue until they hit 18. Or the incident was concealed, so the victim couldn't take action until the concealment was gone. 0 - https://www.trustwelllaw.com/resources/legal-term-faq/statute-of-limitations https://www.trustwelllaw.com/resources/legal-term-faq/statut...
- WarmWash 4mo agoIt's rare that judge's overturn jury verdicts, compared to other judge's verdicts. The constitution leans a lot on jury verdicts, and judges tend to respect that.