Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:I think that kid is a little sh#t.
But as a parent I’m disappointed in this ruling...
This culture of reporting what is trending is bad for all of us.
He may be a little prick, but the whole thing was misrepresented/misreported by the media for the first day or two.
A defamation suit is the wrong way to address that.
Hitting corporations in their wallet seems to be the only way.
Filing frivolous lawsuits? Great strategy.
I totally disagree that it was frivolous, and I hope they pursue it further.
Anonymous wrote:I think that kid is a little sh#t.
But as a parent I’m disappointed in this ruling...
This culture of reporting what is trending is bad for all of us.
He may be a little prick, but the whole thing was misrepresented/misreported by the media for the first day or two.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:I think that kid is a little sh#t.
But as a parent I’m disappointed in this ruling...
This culture of reporting what is trending is bad for all of us.
He may be a little prick, but the whole thing was misrepresented/misreported by the media for the first day or two.
A defamation suit is the wrong way to address that.
Hitting corporations in their wallet seems to be the only way.
Filing frivolous lawsuits? Great strategy.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:I think that kid is a little sh#t.
But as a parent I’m disappointed in this ruling...
This culture of reporting what is trending is bad for all of us.
He may be a little prick, but the whole thing was misrepresented/misreported by the media for the first day or two.
A defamation suit is the wrong way to address that.
Hitting corporations in their wallet seems to be the only way.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:I think that kid is a little sh#t.
But as a parent I’m disappointed in this ruling...
This culture of reporting what is trending is bad for all of us.
He may be a little prick, but the whole thing was misrepresented/misreported by the media for the first day or two.
A defamation suit is the wrong way to address that.
Anonymous wrote:I think that kid is a little sh#t.
But as a parent I’m disappointed in this ruling...
This culture of reporting what is trending is bad for all of us.
He may be a little prick, but the whole thing was misrepresented/misreported by the media for the first day or two.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Wonder how much more money the kid's family will waste on an appeal.
Didn't that fancy First Amendment lawyer take this on pro Bono, as a vehicle to change First Amendment law and make even more of a name for himself?
I guess this won't get before Justice Thomas after all. Maybe one of the other suits will get farther.
Anonymous wrote:Wonder how much more money the kid's family will waste on an appeal.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Good.
+1
Correct ruling. And reassuring.
Especially from Kentucky district.
Appointed by Jimmy Carter.
Any reasonably competent judge would've made the same ruling. It was a stupid lawsuit.