Blake Lively- Jason Baldoni and NYT - False Light claims

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Serious question: What would happen if you are a regular, normal Internet user (i.e. not a content creator) and you got subpoeaned and you just...ignored it?

I'm not asking for some sort of abstract answer like, "You could get in trouble." I want the nitty gritty. I want to hear about the tangible consequences and sequence of events that would happen. e.g. TikTok/Reddit/X would pass along your information, then you'd get a letter from the court, then blah blah blah.

I must know!

Why, are you getting worried?

Yes, a little. I have shit talked them on their Instagrams, lol. I was also the Team JBer who expressed worry that they would come after commenters next, before they subpoeaned CCers, and for some reason people think that means I'm Team BL and I'm trying to suppress the discussion about this.

I actually do think their team is doing more than just targeting negative comments tbh (there are so very many negative comments!!! but they are only choosing a few from each app) so I really do think you will be okay. FWIW, when this happened with ... Google? and the prior TAG employees Case and Koslow, Google informed the employees who owned the website, and they filed an objection to the subpoena in court. That filing actually ID'd them as the likely owners of the website, but if you want to keep your anonymity but file a MTQ a/g a subpoena, Liman has publicized the way to file a motion with the court at the same time you file the MTQ to stay anonymous. You would probably want to hire a lawyer. But I really, really, really, really don't think you're getting subpoenaed. (Or have you been working with Baldoni all along lolol?)

That said, boo to you for going on some stranger's instagram to say sh!tty things. People here actually do that, like they are 10 year old children? Sheesh.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Lots of attempts at rationalizing by the Lovely posters over the past 12 hours. Is that one of the stages of grief?

It's funny because when Freedman does ridiculous things, the Baldoni supporters (1) do not admit it and (2) completely disappear from the board. So roast me if you like but at least I'm dealing with actual reality.

Freedman has been pretty hands off in recent weeks. You continue to be obsessed with him.

He fake punched and cursed out his opposing counsel less than a month ago, which was filed on this docket only 2 weeks ago. Time flies for you I guess.

Honestly though this case gets less interesting to me if Freedman is taken off of it, just because he causes so much wreckage and mayhem. We'll see what happens with the judge's decision on the subpoena for communications from the Liner Freedman itself re the smear, which I think is a tough argument to make but expect the judge to decide very soon, possibly within the next few days, given the tight turnaround. If the judge does not decide this issue soon, I think that's a sign he will not grant the discovery, given the short remaining timeline to collect such communications.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Lots of attempts at rationalizing by the Lovely posters over the past 12 hours. Is that one of the stages of grief?

It's funny because when Freedman does ridiculous things, the Baldoni supporters (1) do not admit it and (2) completely disappear from the board. So roast me if you like but at least I'm dealing with actual reality.

Freedman has been pretty hands off in recent weeks. You continue to be obsessed with him.

He fake punched and cursed out his opposing counsel less than a month ago, which was filed on this docket only 2 weeks ago. Time flies for you I guess.

Honestly though this case gets less interesting to me if Freedman is taken off of it, just because he causes so much wreckage and mayhem. We'll see what happens with the judge's decision on the subpoena for communications from the Liner Freedman itself re the smear, which I think is a tough argument to make but expect the judge to decide very soon, possibly within the next few days, given the tight turnaround. If the judge does not decide this issue soon, I think that's a sign he will not grant the discovery, given the short remaining timeline to collect such communications.

He called a hearing on this for July 30.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Serious question: What would happen if you are a regular, normal Internet user (i.e. not a content creator) and you got subpoeaned and you just...ignored it?

I'm not asking for some sort of abstract answer like, "You could get in trouble." I want the nitty gritty. I want to hear about the tangible consequences and sequence of events that would happen. e.g. TikTok/Reddit/X would pass along your information, then you'd get a letter from the court, then blah blah blah.

I must know!

Are you the person who said you would just voluntarily turn over your name?

Nope. See comment above.

Sorry lol I thought you were trolling so you could be all "its no big deal what Blake is doing! Just ignore!"

I think you'd be ok cause Instagram is owned by Meta and Meta is fighting to quash the Jones subpoena whereas YouTube appears ready to give the info unless the account owner fights it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Serious question: What would happen if you are a regular, normal Internet user (i.e. not a content creator) and you got subpoeaned and you just...ignored it?

I'm not asking for some sort of abstract answer like, "You could get in trouble." I want the nitty gritty. I want to hear about the tangible consequences and sequence of events that would happen. e.g. TikTok/Reddit/X would pass along your information, then you'd get a letter from the court, then blah blah blah.

I must know!

Why, are you getting worried?

Yes, a little. I have shit talked them on their Instagrams, lol. I was also the Team JBer who expressed worry that they would come after commenters next, before they subpoeaned CCers, and for some reason people think that means I'm Team BL and I'm trying to suppress the discussion about this.

I actually do think their team is doing more than just targeting negative comments tbh (there are so very many negative comments!!! but they are only choosing a few from each app) so I really do think you will be okay. FWIW, when this happened with ... Google? and the prior TAG employees Case and Koslow, Google informed the employees who owned the website, and they filed an objection to the subpoena in court. That filing actually ID'd them as the likely owners of the website, but if you want to keep your anonymity but file a MTQ a/g a subpoena, Liman has publicized the way to file a motion with the court at the same time you file the MTQ to stay anonymous. You would probably want to hire a lawyer. But I really, really, really, really don't think you're getting subpoenaed. (Or have you been working with Baldoni all along lolol?)

That said, boo to you for going on some stranger's instagram to say sh!tty things. People here actually do that, like they are 10 year old children? Sheesh.

Yeah, I've called her out for claiming to be a voice for women while calling men like Woody Allen "empowering." Sue me. (or maybe Blake will?)

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Serious question: What would happen if you are a regular, normal Internet user (i.e. not a content creator) and you got subpoeaned and you just...ignored it?

I'm not asking for some sort of abstract answer like, "You could get in trouble." I want the nitty gritty. I want to hear about the tangible consequences and sequence of events that would happen. e.g. TikTok/Reddit/X would pass along your information, then you'd get a letter from the court, then blah blah blah.

I must know!

Are you the person who said you would just voluntarily turn over your name?

Nope. See comment above.

Sorry lol I thought you were trolling so you could be all "its no big deal what Blake is doing! Just ignore!"

I think you'd be ok cause Instagram is owned by Meta and Meta is fighting to quash the Jones subpoena whereas YouTube appears ready to give the info unless the account owner fights it.

No, no, definitely wasn't trying to troll concern or anything! Thanks for the reassurance, lol.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Serious question: What would happen if you are a regular, normal Internet user (i.e. not a content creator) and you got subpoeaned and you just...ignored it?

I'm not asking for some sort of abstract answer like, "You could get in trouble." I want the nitty gritty. I want to hear about the tangible consequences and sequence of events that would happen. e.g. TikTok/Reddit/X would pass along your information, then you'd get a letter from the court, then blah blah blah.

I must know!

Why, are you getting worried?

Yes, a little. I have shit talked them on their Instagrams, lol. I was also the Team JBer who expressed worry that they would come after commenters next, before they subpoeaned CCers, and for some reason people think that means I'm Team BL and I'm trying to suppress the discussion about this.

I actually do think their team is doing more than just targeting negative comments tbh (there are so very many negative comments!!! but they are only choosing a few from each app) so I really do think you will be okay. FWIW, when this happened with ... Google? and the prior TAG employees Case and Koslow, Google informed the employees who owned the website, and they filed an objection to the subpoena in court. That filing actually ID'd them as the likely owners of the website, but if you want to keep your anonymity but file a MTQ a/g a subpoena, Liman has publicized the way to file a motion with the court at the same time you file the MTQ to stay anonymous. You would probably want to hire a lawyer. But I really, really, really, really don't think you're getting subpoenaed. (Or have you been working with Baldoni all along lolol?)

That said, boo to you for going on some stranger's instagram to say sh!tty things. People here actually do that, like they are 10 year old children? Sheesh.

Yeah, I've called her out for claiming to be a voice for women while calling men like Woody Allen "empowering." Sue me. (or maybe Blake will?)

Maybe

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Serious question: What would happen if you are a regular, normal Internet user (i.e. not a content creator) and you got subpoeaned and you just...ignored it?

I'm not asking for some sort of abstract answer like, "You could get in trouble." I want the nitty gritty. I want to hear about the tangible consequences and sequence of events that would happen. e.g. TikTok/Reddit/X would pass along your information, then you'd get a letter from the court, then blah blah blah.

I must know!

Why, are you getting worried?

Yes, a little. I have shit talked them on their Instagrams, lol. I was also the Team JBer who expressed worry that they would come after commenters next, before they subpoeaned CCers, and for some reason people think that means I'm Team BL and I'm trying to suppress the discussion about this.

I wouldn’t worry too much about the Instagram shit talking. I have done this too. Right after the CC’s got subpoenaed, I made some comments about BL going after women content creators and infringing on free speech . I noticed her post that’s opened to comments, since she’s only tagged in it has over 11,000 comments and skimming thru its mostly all negative stuff and maybe a rare positive comment from a BL defender. So I doubt anything will come out of it

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Serious question: What would happen if you are a regular, normal Internet user (i.e. not a content creator) and you got subpoeaned and you just...ignored it?

I'm not asking for some sort of abstract answer like, "You could get in trouble." I want the nitty gritty. I want to hear about the tangible consequences and sequence of events that would happen. e.g. TikTok/Reddit/X would pass along your information, then you'd get a letter from the court, then blah blah blah.

I must know!

Why, are you getting worried?

Yes, a little. I have shit talked them on their Instagrams, lol. I was also the Team JBer who expressed worry that they would come after commenters next, before they subpoeaned CCers, and for some reason people think that means I'm Team BL and I'm trying to suppress the discussion about this.

I wouldn’t worry too much about the Instagram shit talking. I have done this too. Right after the CC’s got subpoenaed, I made some comments about BL going after women content creators and infringing on free speech . I noticed her post that’s opened to comments, since she’s only tagged in it has over 11,000 comments and skimming thru its mostly all negative stuff and maybe a rare positive comment from a BL defender. So I doubt anything will come out of it

Blake is like: 11,000? Hold my beer.

[Anonymous]

An attorney commenting on the Harco lawsuit: https://www.tiktok.com/@miraclesrule/video/7530132020622757175

She thinks Wayfarer messed up by not reporting Blake's 17 points as a potential claim, and also notes it's a shame because the contract actually included 75k "crisis management" coverage.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:An attorney commenting on the Harco lawsuit: https://www.tiktok.com/@miraclesrule/video/7530132020622757175

She thinks Wayfarer messed up by not reporting Blake's 17 points as a potential claim, and also notes it's a shame because the contract actually included 75k "crisis management" coverage.

Thanks for summary as clicked it I couldn’t watch past her introducing herself

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:An attorney commenting on the Harco lawsuit: https://www.tiktok.com/@miraclesrule/video/7530132020622757175

She thinks Wayfarer messed up by not reporting Blake's 17 points as a potential claim, and also notes it's a shame because the contract actually included 75k "crisis management" coverage.

Thanks for summary as clicked it I couldn’t watch past her introducing herself

Was she wearing bunny ears and glasses shaped like an eternity symbol?

[Anonymous]

More pro se stuff has been popping up. It's mostly Motions to Quash from the content creators, but also Perez Hilton requesting a protective order and a random guy making an argument why Lively's claims should be dismissed or summary judgment granted to Wayfarer (ie, what Freedman never bothered to do, and the guy has some decent points!).

The content creators mostly use similar templates but personalize them to their situations. There's one from Canada, one from the UK, and one who had just ONE subscriber. The one from the UK actually did have contact with Wayfarer's counsel because she's the one who tipped them off to the infamous NYT metadata, but she says they never replied to her. She says she was a domestic violence victim and calls the subpoena a digital strip search and points out several mistakes from Hudson.

I'm fascinated at how this will shake out... like, is Manatt going to rack up billables responding to whether they are required to follow the procedures under UK law when the creator is a British citizen but the subpoena is to Google? Are they going to argue they can't know if the creators are lying unless they get the IP proving they're not in the US? Are they going to get all aggressive and accuse them of crimes? (Some people on reddit want one of the creators prosecuted for allegedly committing perjury by using a fake name).

They are so passionate I actually wonder if strategically, Wayfarer should ask if any of them want to volunteer to testify at trial and basically just explain how they, organically, started hating Lively on their own. It would be a free trip to NY and publicity for them... I think some would definitely do it!

I just again have no clue why Lively's side would open this all up. They really better have a damn good reason because it's so ridiculous. And this will all be coming to a head late next week when the lawyers will be there in person for a hearing regarding the subpoena to Freedman's law firm.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:More pro se stuff has been popping up. It's mostly Motions to Quash from the content creators, but also Perez Hilton requesting a protective order and a random guy making an argument why Lively's claims should be dismissed or summary judgment granted to Wayfarer (ie, what Freedman never bothered to do, and the guy has some decent points!).

The content creators mostly use similar templates but personalize them to their situations. There's one from Canada, one from the UK, and one who had just ONE subscriber. The one from the UK actually did have contact with Wayfarer's counsel because she's the one who tipped them off to the infamous NYT metadata, but she says they never replied to her. She says she was a domestic violence victim and calls the subpoena a digital strip search and points out several mistakes from Hudson.

I'm fascinated at how this will shake out... like, is Manatt going to rack up billables responding to whether they are required to follow the procedures under UK law when the creator is a British citizen but the subpoena is to Google? Are they going to argue they can't know if the creators are lying unless they get the IP proving they're not in the US? Are they going to get all aggressive and accuse them of crimes? (Some people on reddit want one of the creators prosecuted for allegedly committing perjury by using a fake name).

They are so passionate I actually wonder if strategically, Wayfarer should ask if any of them want to volunteer to testify at trial and basically just explain how they, organically, started hating Lively on their own. It would be a free trip to NY and publicity for them... I think some would definitely do it!

I just again have no clue why Lively's side would open this all up. They really better have a damn good reason because it's so ridiculous. And this will all be coming to a head late next week when the lawyers will be there in person for a hearing regarding the subpoena to Freedman's law firm.

This won't be popular, but I don't honestly think these are well done so far and I do hope that someone does hire an attorney to fully represent the interests of these folks. I think that people enjoy digs these make to Lively, but some of what they are suggesting is not going to fly with the judge -- though I do think he will be generally sympathetic to their concerns re overreach and privacy.

That said, I do think that the fact that most of these folks are NOT hiring real lawyers suggests they don't think they have anything to be worried about.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:They are so passionate I actually wonder if strategically, Wayfarer should ask if any of them want to volunteer to testify at trial and basically just explain how they, organically, started hating Lively on their own. It would be a free trip to NY and publicity for them... I think some would definitely do it!

Lmao I love it, that would be hilarious. But if they agreed at Wayfarer’s request, wouldn’t Blake then try to argue that this proves they actually were in cahoots?