491–500 of 1001 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
That's why we have courts and juries, to make these evaluations. Why should your number should be used over theirs?
Because it's obviously crazy. 1 billion dollars is the 588 people's entire life income. It's just excessive.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Let’s talk about scale: Jones has to pay ~5x what Boeing did. Boeing killed 346 people https://apnews.com/article/boeing-guilty-plea-crashes-245a38...
Boeing killed people while making a not-good-enough design for a highly complex airplane system. And even though it killed 346 ppl, it continues to get millions people safely from point to point safely. It's negligent and they need to change, but it's pretty forgivable. Jones went on a mic and ripped false info, enriching no one but himself and grieving these families repeatedly.
It is clear that Jones and his relatives have moved money and assets around in order to shield them from the verdict. Now, money that should have been already given to the victims is being used to steal back the megaphone that caused harmed in the first place. The end effect will probably be even more subscribers and money for Jones which he will use with even less restraint since he knows there are no consequences.…
Surely there must be a legally viable way to resolve such a bankruptcy that doesn't involve the assailant buying back the gun with funds raised from friends.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
What he did was beyond mere defamation. It was heinous, it was blatant and deliberate dishonesty, and targeted vulnerable victims. Repeating the verifiable lie that the Sandy Hook incident did not happen, and promoting violence against the surviving families, despite repeated opportunities to stop without penalty, is beyond forgivable. And this penalty is because he declined to defend this behavior. Remember, it's a…
No matter how heinous you may find his speech, in America, under the First Amendment, Jones (or any nutball or even Nazi you may choose to pick) has a right to say it - even if he has a large Radio and Podcast megaphone. The First Amendment is nearly absolute, and must protect unpopular and offensive speech even more than it protects popular speech. (Don't start with the bogus "fire in a crowded theater exception" -…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I haven’t been following closely - I wonder if the people who made the death threats were charged? I haven’t heard anything about that.
[flagged]
https://thepostmillennial.com/new-former-fbi-current-cia-say...
It is clear that Jones and his relatives have moved money and assets around in order to shield them from the verdict. Now, money that should have been already given to the victims is being used to steal back the megaphone that caused harmed in the first place. The end effect will probably be even more subscribers and money for Jones which he will use with even less restraint since he knows there are no consequences.…
"no consequences." This is basically going to be the United States for the immediate future, if you're connected to the right people. Downvote all you want, but we see it with our own eyes.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Yeah, we don't have that in Sweden except for criminal acts, and then the fines are a certain number of days of your income as a substitute for imprisonment. In civil cases our judgements are usually not enormous. I don't feel that your reasoning above makes the judgement more reasonable. Maybe he does reach that many people, but he obviously makes nowhere near that amount of money and it's out of line with other def…
> it's out of line with other defamation judgements. This point made me curious so I quickly looked around. Fox News paid a $787.5 million settlement [1] for making false claims about Dominion. Given that this happened as the trial was about to start, it's reasonable to assume that Fox News expected to lose even more if the issue went to trial. And that's for a party that arguably would have followed court orders, so…
Depp v Herd defamation was around $10m.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Put simply, the internet is wrong. FUAC's offer was all cash. The Onion offered less cash, but offered other incentives (AIUI, a share of whatever revenue they make from Infowars in the future). Saying that The Onion's bid was lower requires you to put a dollar value on those other incentives. The fact that the two creditors (read: victims' families) that would benefit from those incentives were willing to sacrifice…
The idea that Global Tetrahedron would generate revenue from InfoWars is a farce. Jones is InfoWars. Any market value assigned to InfoWars without Jones explicitly involvement is a farce. Even a non bankruptcy sale of InfoWars would require him to participate in the business for an extended period of time. Even then, it'd just be some investor bankrolling Jones.
It is clear that Jones and his relatives have moved money and assets around in order to shield them from the verdict. Now, money that should have been already given to the victims is being used to steal back the megaphone that caused harmed in the first place. The end effect will probably be even more subscribers and money for Jones which he will use with even less restraint since he knows there are no consequences.…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Bankruptcy law is federal law, Delaware law has nothing to do with it.
They typically file in the United States Court for the District of Delaware, a federal court located in Delaware. Delaware law plays a significant part in these cases even though they’re in Fed court. Corporate charters, filings, fiduciary duties, property rights, choice of laws, etc etc etc are all determined by Delaware law and used in the federal court. Federal Bankruptcy Law provides the procedural framework. So,…
How would the corporate charter affect the fairness of how the auction was conducted?