71–80 of 239 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It’s strange, it’s crashing Safari on iOS: Mirror here: https://archive.ph/vfOkX
How on earth is this page killing all 3 mobile rendering engines?! I literally can't view the page on my phone.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I'm not going to elaborate other than to say my speech was restrained due to someone else's actions, but family court is definitely an area where common practice has strayed very, very far from anything resembling constitutionality. One such example: https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/volokh-conspiracy/wp/201...
You can't bring up an anecdote as a counterpoint then refuse to explain the anecdote. It's a bit unfair. Edit: someone posted the rules that says we should accept people's comments in good faith. I'll try to do that. Leaving this comment for posterity.
You’re not owed anything by anyone here, and they did bring up an example about family court and link to an article about it. :)
So either 1) the lawyers ripped off J&J by spending time on this or 2) J&J management was so angry and irrational that they demanded the lawyers waste their time on this. Every lawyer worth their salt in America knows that you can’t get an injunction to prevent someone from publishing something. That’s a prior restraint and is about as close as you can get to something absolutely forbidden under American law.
A lot of contracts people sign (NDAs and federal security clearance paperwork being the two examples that spring to mind) include clauses allowing a judge to issue a prior restraint injunction if you try to violate them.
I have seen several people talk personally about why they do not trust the vaccine from Johnson and Johnson on HN over the last year in various comments. Overwhelmingly they were attacked when they spoke on the cancer link with talc powder. Regardless of the direct correlation or none at all to the 'contaminated' talc they were selling as a product with baby in the name, and it verifiable contained asbestos. I think…
As well they should be. Feeding vaccine FUD over an unrelated incident is dangerous at a time when trust in our institutions is so vital.
So either 1) the lawyers ripped off J&J by spending time on this or 2) J&J management was so angry and irrational that they demanded the lawyers waste their time on this. Every lawyer worth their salt in America knows that you can’t get an injunction to prevent someone from publishing something. That’s a prior restraint and is about as close as you can get to something absolutely forbidden under American law.
"you can’t get an injunction to prevent someone from publishing something." You can't, in theory. In practice this sort of thing happens all the time. I had a judge issue a clearly unconstitutional order limiting my speech (there was no action on my part leading up to this, it was a broad order applying to more than just me). My lawyer's take was that while it was clearly not allowed, it wasn't particularly important…
"Dear mobsters, this is the address where the FBI has sequestered a witness" is around the place the bar is.
"That report might be defamatory to a corporation because we can argue it is untrue" is nowhere near the bar (truth is an affirmative defense, and the possible harm is reconcilable in law via monetary compensation and damages).
So either 1) the lawyers ripped off J&J by spending time on this or 2) J&J management was so angry and irrational that they demanded the lawyers waste their time on this. Every lawyer worth their salt in America knows that you can’t get an injunction to prevent someone from publishing something. That’s a prior restraint and is about as close as you can get to something absolutely forbidden under American law.
"you can’t get an injunction to prevent someone from publishing something." You can't, in theory. In practice this sort of thing happens all the time. I had a judge issue a clearly unconstitutional order limiting my speech (there was no action on my part leading up to this, it was a broad order applying to more than just me). My lawyer's take was that while it was clearly not allowed, it wasn't particularly important…
FISA court orders, family court, settlement agreements, arbitration, civil lawsuits, criminal trials, etc
There are so many different ways you can be “gagged” it’s very common.
There’s a reason they tried to get the publication stopped - because it often works.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Although I know I'm wrong 99% of the time I sometimes get that feeling about my fellow programmers when I look at code...
Yeah, there is probably truth in that, too. I did hear people complain about some new UI/UX, on how it makes it too easy for nontechnical people to use it.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
This same judge said something along the lines of "there are no limits on my ability to issue orders until an appeals court overturns them." He was keenly aware that the issue wasn't significant enough to appeal and that his power was essentially unchecked. Lawyers are very aware of this dynamic.
This is why it is so important to have wise judges that are held to a very high moral standard.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I'm not going to elaborate other than to say my speech was restrained due to someone else's actions, but family court is definitely an area where common practice has strayed very, very far from anything resembling constitutionality. One such example: https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/volokh-conspiracy/wp/201...
You can't bring up an anecdote as a counterpoint then refuse to explain the anecdote. It's a bit unfair. Edit: someone posted the rules that says we should accept people's comments in good faith. I'll try to do that. Leaving this comment for posterity.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
You can't bring up an anecdote as a counterpoint then refuse to explain the anecdote. It's a bit unfair. Edit: someone posted the rules that says we should accept people's comments in good faith. I'll try to do that. Leaving this comment for posterity.
They absolutely do not have to explain themselves further. They owe you (and us) nothing.