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

Judge finalizes order for Greenpeace to pay $345M in ND oil pipeline case

northdakotamonitor.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

121–130 of 245 posts

Re: Judge finalizes order for Greenpeace to pay $345M in ND oil pipeline case

#121

Post by switchbak »

toomuchtodo wrote: post #111
some_random wrote: post #103

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They're a bunch of lifetime activists who spun up an authoritative sounding NGO that has done literally nothing else, but yeah muh corruption.

Oil companies have been suppressing climate change research for decades to keep cooking the earth for profits. Is that not corruption? I suppose if you are economically exposed to these gains, don’t believe in climate change, and/or won’t be here for the bad times from this, the facts may not matter to your mental model. The facts remain that climate change is real and oil companies are doing their best to extract ev…

You know, it's possible for these oil companies to have done all this bad stuff, and for Greenpeace to be a pretty shitty organization. And for the person to have a different mindset than all the strawman assumptions you just made.

Re: Judge finalizes order for Greenpeace to pay $345M in ND oil pipeline case

#122

Post by QuadmasterXLII »

foolfoolz wrote: post #3

> Greenpeace maintains it only had six employees visit the protest camps, and that all worked for Greenpeace USA, not Greenpeace Fund or Greenpeace International. > The jury found Greenpeace USA liable for almost all claims. how does this happen? did greenepeace just run a bad trial? or lose all public trust?

North Dakota jury breaking things to please Daddy T. On a larger scale, jury trials for defamation are a ticking time bomb catastrophe, long term incompatible with free speech. Source: was on a defamation jury and it was an utter clown fiesta and pretty close to ended my remaining faith in the US legal system and the population as a whole.

Re: Judge finalizes order for Greenpeace to pay $345M in ND oil pipeline case

#123

Post by mullingitover »

whywhywhywhy wrote: post #68
foolfoolz wrote: post #3

> Greenpeace maintains it only had six employees visit the protest camps, and that all worked for Greenpeace USA, not Greenpeace Fund or Greenpeace International. > The jury found Greenpeace USA liable for almost all claims. how does this happen? did greenepeace just run a bad trial? or lose all public trust?

> Greenpeace USA, not Greenpeace Fund or Greenpeace International Why is something like this allowed to exist... Stacking entities and funneling wealth around in the guise of a noble cause.

You're going to lose it when you discover that stacking entities and funneling wealth around happens as routinely as eating lunch, and it's the noble cause part that's the outlier here.

Re: Judge finalizes order for Greenpeace to pay $345M in ND oil pipeline case

#124

Post by nickpsecurity »

toomuchtodo wrote: post #111
some_random wrote: post #103

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They're a bunch of lifetime activists who spun up an authoritative sounding NGO that has done literally nothing else, but yeah muh corruption.

Oil companies have been suppressing climate change research for decades to keep cooking the earth for profits. Is that not corruption? I suppose if you are economically exposed to these gains, don’t believe in climate change, and/or won’t be here for the bad times from this, the facts may not matter to your mental model. The facts remain that climate change is real and oil companies are doing their best to extract ev…

[flagged]

Re: Judge finalizes order for Greenpeace to pay $345M in ND oil pipeline case

#125

Post by mullingitover »

some_random wrote: post #79
shrubby wrote: post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

SLAPP as in Strategic Lawsuit Against Public Participation. To keep the dissenting voices quiet and to scare other groups from protesting. Modus operandi for many industries.

That is objectively not what happened here though, the point of SLAPP is that it's a frivolous suit that's meant to just exhaust the resources of the "dissenting voices". They won this suit and honestly it's not hard to believe that Greenpeace is guilty to some degree even if proving it is.

> the point of SLAPP is that it's a frivolous suit

The point is to shut people up. Lawyers don't like filing literally frivolous suits, that type of activity gets you disbarred.

Re: Judge finalizes order for Greenpeace to pay $345M in ND oil pipeline case

#126

Post by jcranmer »

toomuchtodo wrote: post #111
some_random wrote: post #103

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They're a bunch of lifetime activists who spun up an authoritative sounding NGO that has done literally nothing else, but yeah muh corruption.

Oil companies have been suppressing climate change research for decades to keep cooking the earth for profits. Is that not corruption? I suppose if you are economically exposed to these gains, don’t believe in climate change, and/or won’t be here for the bad times from this, the facts may not matter to your mental model. The facts remain that climate change is real and oil companies are doing their best to extract ev…

Oil companies have a definite history of punching people and then suing them for running into their fist. But I should also point out that Greenpeace is the kind of shitty activist company that also does those kind of tactics, so an oil company suing Greenpeace leaves my priors as "I don't know which side is more likely right in this scenario."

Re: Judge finalizes order for Greenpeace to pay $345M in ND oil pipeline case

#127

Post by dmix »

mistrial9 wrote: post #89
JumpCrisscross wrote: post #82

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As an outsider, why is this a credible institution over the jury and judge?

related topic -- "Judge shopping" refers to the practice of litigants strategically filing lawsuits in court districts or divisions where they are likely to be assigned to a judge sympathetic to their cause, often exploiting structural quirks in the judiciary

Most state courts randomly assign you a judge so it's not that simple, in some cases you can target certain districts in certain states where there are less judges (like the Texas patent judge). This is a trial in North Dakota because that's where the protests happened. I doubt they had many options in a single jurisdiction. The fallback for this stuff is of course a circuit court appeal.

Re: Judge finalizes order for Greenpeace to pay $345M in ND oil pipeline case

#128

Post by newsoftheday »

kombine wrote: post #120
rayiner wrote: post #51

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The protests involved what activists call “direct action,” which involves trespassing on private property, blockading workers, or damaging equipment in an effort to prevent otherwise lawful activity. For example, activists admitted to setting fire to equipment and pipeline valves in an effort to stop construction: https://www.kcci.com/article/2-women-admit-to-causing-damage... . That’s legally straightforward conduct…

> The protests involved what activists call “direct action,” which involves trespassing on private property, blockading workers, or damaging equipment in an effort to prevent otherwise lawful activity. For example, activists admitted to setting fire to equipment and pipeline valves in an effort to stop construction Decades and centuries from now our descendants will be dealing with the consequences of the destroyed c…

> "the laws"

We live under law or we die under anarchy.

Re: Judge finalizes order for Greenpeace to pay $345M in ND oil pipeline case

#129

Post by [deleted] »

AnimalMuppet wrote: post #5
foolfoolz wrote: post #3

> Greenpeace maintains it only had six employees visit the protest camps, and that all worked for Greenpeace USA, not Greenpeace Fund or Greenpeace International. > The jury found Greenpeace USA liable for almost all claims. how does this happen? did greenepeace just run a bad trial? or lose all public trust?

Or maybe, just maybe, they actually did unreasonably damage the pipeline company's reputation, in a way that is outside the legally-recognized bounds of free speech. Maybe justice actually was done. (Note well: I haven't been following this case closely enough to say. But you should at least consider that as a possibility.)

[deleted]

Re: Judge finalizes order for Greenpeace to pay $345M in ND oil pipeline case

#130

Post by thunderfork »

newsoftheday wrote: post #128
kombine wrote: post #120

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The protests involved what activists call “direct action,” which involves trespassing on private property, blockading workers, or damaging equipment in an effort to prevent otherwise lawful activity. For example, activists admitted to setting fire to equipment and pipeline valves in an effort to stop construction Decades and centuries from now our descendants will be dealing with the consequences of the destroyed c…

> "the laws" We live under law or we die under anarchy.

You can die under law, too.
Post reply on HN