Reply to Blake Lively- Jason Baldoni and NYT

Forum Index » Entertainment and Pop Culture

Reply to "Blake Lively- Jason Baldoni and NYT - False Light claims "

Subject:

Emoticons





More smilies

Text Color: Font: Close Marks

[quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous]I don’t think she is saying tell me who they are so I can expose their identity to everyone. I think she’s saying tell me who they are so I can figure out if they were getting paid to smear me. And I don’t mind that.

People who post shit on x and other social media are ultimately responsible forbthebshit they do post imo.[/quote]

Regarding the first point, I don't think there is an intent to necessarily publish their names, but it's an invasive subpoena (including asking for bank account information, which they will likely then subpoena as well). We have seen on the docket that the BL side is not careful about redacting names and addresses of non-parties like the Wayfarer employees. That's normal in litigation and they're not required to redact, but I can absolutely see how that is scary to these social media users. They need to reveal their identities just to assert their rights here! I guess they could file for a protective order but how many know to do that and what if something slips through? Even for those who are not challenging it, their names could end up listed in further motions down the line. Many are pro se or can't afford a lawyer.

Second, "posting shit" without legal consequences is absolutely their legal right. They are not even being accused of any wrongdoing, not even defamation (knowingly posting lies). Just posting their opinion on a legal case is totally their right. Bashing BL or JB is anyone's right. The fact that you are calling it the shit they post is already indicative that being served a subpoena is implying they did something wrong when there is zero indication that is the case.

If you're a Lively supporter on here I would expect you to be sensitive to this since you guys are called paid shills for Lively every single day with zero evidence other than people don't like your opinions (and I have defended you guys on that before although obviously this is an anon board so you wouldn't know that). If that's what Lively is doing I can't support that at all and it's kind of batshit. If Lively's responses to MTQs indicate that these particular creators were served because there is some link to the Wayfarer or Wallace parties that has been unearthed in earlier discovery, I'll be more understanding. If it's JUST that they post negative stuff then sorry but that is an insane fishing expedition.[/quote]

Options

	Disable HTML in this message
	Disable BB Code in this message
	Disable smilies in this message

Review message

Search Recent Topics Hottest Topics