RSS
Even After Being Disbarred, Jack Thompson Can File Misguided Mistargeted Lawsuits
from the good-luck,-Jack dept
Ah, Jack Thompson. The lawyer who made a name for himself years ago by trying to misdirect the blame for pretty much any violent action by any teenager by claiming that it was "the video games' fault" has since been disbarred, and last we heard was getting scolded by Utah state politicians -- the one state where politicians were still putting up with his unsubstantiated claims. And, of course, through it all he continues to claim that everyone is out to get him -- with various video game blogs being a favorite target.
Of course, even though he's been disbarred, it doesn't mean he can't continue filing misguided lawsuits on a pro se basis -- and that's what he's done now. Eric Goldman alerts us to the news that Jack Thompson is now suing Facebook because some people on Facebook have said some mean stuff about him. Now, there's no doubt that some people online have said incredibly mean and hateful things about Jack, and may have made statements that are potentially threatening. But, apparently, while filing all of these lawsuits and getting disbarred, Jack Thompson never bothered to read Section 230 of the CDA, which protects the service provider (such as, say, Facebook) from the actions of its users. Details, apparently, are not Thompson's strong suit:
There's a bit in there where he suggests that there's some massive organized campaign against him, rather than just a bunch of random people having fun with him, because they appear to think he's a bit out to lunch.
Of course, even though he's been disbarred, it doesn't mean he can't continue filing misguided lawsuits on a pro se basis -- and that's what he's done now. Eric Goldman alerts us to the news that Jack Thompson is now suing Facebook because some people on Facebook have said some mean stuff about him. Now, there's no doubt that some people online have said incredibly mean and hateful things about Jack, and may have made statements that are potentially threatening. But, apparently, while filing all of these lawsuits and getting disbarred, Jack Thompson never bothered to read Section 230 of the CDA, which protects the service provider (such as, say, Facebook) from the actions of its users. Details, apparently, are not Thompson's strong suit:
I’m looking for research...
The Growing App Market
Why Data Is The New Oil, With Dan Foreman Of Lumi Mobile
I have an idea...
Securing Venture Capital for that Next App Development
App Developer Conversations: Successful Fundraising Techniques
I have a business...
The Talent Wars: Today's Toughest Startup Challenge
Why 50,000 Monthly Active Users Weren't Enough To Stop This Company From Pivoting, With Spun Co-Founder Scott Lindenbaum
Reader Comments (rss)
(Flattened / Threaded)
(Jack Thompson vs. Techdirt in 3...2...1...)
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
Re:
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
Re:
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
Obvious misdirect
He should also sue "crowd sourcing" since there is an organized campaign against him on the inter-web thingy.
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
Declare Him A “Vexatious Litigant”
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Declare Him A �Vexatious Litigant�
In some states, including mine, a person can be declared a vexatious litigant and thereafter requires court approval before he can file any action. Only one person has ever been so declared, and it was because he was suing the judges themselves.
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
Must be karma
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
Hmm
Threatening people is childish, but it should be taken seriously and as much as I dislike Jack Thompson's views, I completely agree that something has to be done to show threatening people is NOT okay.
Quite a few people have been hurt or even died from scandals on social networking sites like Facebook and Myspace, like the girl who committed suicide after a neighbor woman pretended to be a young good-looking boy on Myspace, then 'broke up' with the girl, telling her that her life was worthless and she should kill herself. Granted, it is probably either the psycho woman's fault for being crazy in the head, or the parents' fault for not knowing what was going on, or not raising their daughter to believe in herself and not need boys to feel good about herself, but the social networking sites seriously need to be forced to hold some form of responsibility if they are just going to let things like threats--or worse--happen. Dare I say, we need internet police? A crazy concept, but innocent and unwitting people are being hurt by the nut-cases who use the internet as their weapon of choice.
In the end, the internet is a dangerous place, and as much as I agree with free speech and all of that, there is a line that has been crossed many times now.
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
Hmm
Threatening people is childish, but it should be taken seriously and as much as I dislike Jack Thompson's views, I completely agree that something has to be done to show threatening people is NOT okay.
Quite a few people have been hurt or even died from scandals on social networking sites like Facebook and Myspace, like the girl who committed suicide after a neighbor woman pretended to be a young good-looking boy on Myspace, then 'broke up' with the girl, telling her that her life was worthless and she should kill herself. Granted, it is probably either the psycho woman's fault for being crazy in the head, or the parents' fault for not knowing what was going on, or not raising their daughter to believe in herself and not need boys to feel good about herself, but the social networking sites seriously need to be forced to hold some form of responsibility if they are just going to let things like threats--or worse--happen. Dare I say, we need internet police? A crazy concept, but innocent and unwitting people are being hurt by the nut-cases who use the internet as their weapon of choice.
In the end, the internet is a dangerous place, and as much as I agree with free speech and all of that, there is a line that has been crossed many times now.
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re:
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
I agree with Devin, but ...
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
Sue me if you don't like it, Good luck with that.
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Hmm
You are either incredibly naive or just trolling.
So you beleive enacting some kind of legislation is going to stop people from being (and there's no other word for it) assholes? You don't see any kind of slippery slope insofar as free speech is concerned? Do you realize the amount of content that users put up on Facebook daily? It numbers in the tens of millions. Facebook is simply a tool to let people connect and is no more responsible for "allowing" that girls death than it is for juvenile idiots threatening Thompson. That's why the Safe Harbors legislation was enacted. While the girls death is tragic, she could have reacted the same way to a phone call or a handwritten letter. Would you then accuse Verizon or the US Postal Service of "allowing" it to happen?
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
Re:
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Hmm
i think you're just taking things too seriously. virtually everything written on the internet is either false or sarcastic. the proof is even in your own email. do you really think "hot sluts are waiting for your massive man meat right now"?
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
Video games make me aggresive!
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
Re:
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
To Bad
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
Jack Thompson is a victim
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Hmm
You may be onto something there! We may want to also look into enforcing phone companies to take responsibility for threats over the phone, too. Oh wait...that's right, that would be illegal. And why would it be legal on Facebook? Not to mention we're not even talking completely within US borders anymore.
You do know there are already current laws in place for serious threats on life, right? And I do mean serious. Imagine the world if you got arrested every time you said "I'm gonna kill you!" even though you really had no intent to do so.
Yes, the world is full of childish antics, but you know what? That's life. Learn to live with it and not take it so personal.
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
Add Your Comment