Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

J&J tried to get federal judge to block publication of Reuters story

reuters.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

101–110 of 239 posts

Re: J&J tried to get federal judge to block publication of Reuters story

#101

Post by wizzwizz4 »

londons_explore wrote: post #55
bitcharmer wrote: post #49

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> freedom of press is quite limited there Could you please be more specific? Because I've lived here for a long time and I'd call this statement utter BS.

The UK doesn't in general protect "free speech". While most things you can say, there are a bunch of things that will land you in prison, even if they are true.

I didn't think it was ever illegal to say things that were true, justified, and in the public interest to have spoken. Could you give some examples (or point me at the relevant laws) please?

Re: J&J tried to get federal judge to block publication of Reuters story

#102

Post by pseingatl »

legalcorrection wrote: post #19

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.

Nevertheless, injunctions have issued. Given Assange & Wikileaks, it is silly to pretend that it cannot happen. The Espionage Act exists, as do laws prohibiting commercial espionage as well.

Re: J&J tried to get federal judge to block publication of Reuters story

#103

Post by tedivm »

hedora wrote: post #10
baybal2 wrote: post #2

How talc causes cancer?

In addition to often containing asbestos, pure talc can cause cancer by getting stuck where it shouldn't and causing chronic irritation, etc. The most common issue is ovarian cancer, and talc used to be widely marketed for feminine hygiene.

It's still used by parents in diapers, despite that being a huge cancer risk.

Re: J&J tried to get federal judge to block publication of Reuters story

#104

Post by thoraway88 »

throwaway09223 wrote: post #51
daenz wrote: post #43

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you feel comfortable elaborating, can you explain broadly the purpose for the judge's order? I have heard stories of judges doing things like that during the time period of a divorce or custody battle.

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...

No post body was provided.

Re: J&J tried to get federal judge to block publication of Reuters story

#105

Post by fulafel »

bitcharmer wrote: post #49
fulafel wrote: post #39

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Reuters is a UK company and freedom of press is quite limited there. But a US federal judge of course would be the wrong party to turn to for leveraging this.

> freedom of press is quite limited there Could you please be more specific? Because I've lived here for a long time and I'd call this statement utter BS.

Maybe I generalized too wide from my impressions. It seems that on the freedom of press index the US scores lower (#44) than the UK (#33). But still the absence of constitutional protections and the high profile "libel tourism" cases (including Russian oligarchs suing UK book publishers) would make me give this kind of suit better odds in the UK than in the US.

Re: J&J tried to get federal judge to block publication of Reuters story

#106

Post by tedivm »

mateo1 wrote: post #58
baybal2 wrote: post #2

How talc causes cancer?

If you inhale it or put it in your vagina. Talcum might contain asbestos fibers, caution must be taken for it to be practically asbestos-free and women should be warned, but starch is not a damn replacement for it.

To be clear, even without asbestos talcum powder can cause cancer in women. It also doesn't have to be put directly in a vagina- using it in diapers for children is enough to cause some to potentially migrate in. A study in New England linked the increased cancer risk to inflammation caused by the talcum powder itself.

Re: J&J tried to get federal judge to block publication of Reuters story

#108

Post by fulafel »

wizzwizz4 wrote: post #101
londons_explore wrote: post #55

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The UK doesn't in general protect "free speech". While most things you can say, there are a bunch of things that will land you in prison, even if they are true.

I didn't think it was ever illegal to say things that were true, justified, and in the public interest to have spoken. Could you give some examples (or point me at the relevant laws) please?

Having to prove those things in court, under threat of penalties, is quite a big damper on freedom of press.

Re: J&J tried to get federal judge to block publication of Reuters story

#109

Post by azinman2 »

finnx wrote: post #85
mpyne wrote: post #40

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Indeed, you can never tell what those companies put in their Ivermectin and HCQ tablets these days.

Both (IVM/HCQ) are not patented so there is no reason to depend or trust on multinational pharmaceutical companies. You can access interactive meta analysis of 310 studies for HCQ[1] and 78 studies for ivermectin[2] below, it gets updated when new studies published. They also keep track of other treatments (in total 480[3]). But unfortunately only some of those treatments get media coverage like cannabidiol[4] even w…

https://astralcodexten.substack.com/p/ivermectin-much-more-t...

Re: J&J tried to get federal judge to block publication of Reuters story

#110

Post by dade_ »

I think it was nearly a decade ago and I made an offhand comment to a friend about baby powder causing cancer. He didn’t believe me as the idea seemed absurd, but his aunt worked at J&J and he texted her, she responded with a canned legal response. He was shocked and couldn’t believe this could be kept under wraps.
Post reply on HN