La Russa & The AP Claims Twitter Settled Lawsuit… Twitter Sets The Record Straight

from the that's-not-quite-right dept

Last week, St. Louis Cardinals manager Tony La Russa sued Twitter over a fake account made in his name. La Russa had no case. Multiple lawyers chimed in, and I’ve yet to hear from any who thought he had even a remote chance to win this case. However, the AP reported that Twitter settled, deleted the account and agreed to donate an undisclosed sum to a La Russa-backed charity. This seemed like a really bad idea, because it would just encourage others who had fake accounts opened up to sue. Hell, if someone were really sneaky, they could get a friend to open up a fake account, and then go and sue Twitter to get some settlement money. Giving in to bullies with no legal basis can come back to haunt you.

But… Twitter is claiming the story is not true. It does say that it deleted the account, but that’s because of the terms of service violation — not because of any settlement. Instead:

Reports this week that Twitter has settled a law suit and officially agreed to pay legal fees for an impersonation complaint that was taken care of by our support staff in accordance with our Terms are erroneous. Twitter has not settled, nor do we plan to settle or pay.

With due respect to the man and his notable work, Mr. La Russa’s lawsuit was an unnecessary waste of judicial resources bordering on frivolous. Twitter’s Terms of Service are fair and we believe will be upheld in a court that will ultimately dismiss Mr. La Russa’s lawsuit.

Now that is a lot more like it. In the meantime, it’s worth noting that La Russa still doesn’t seem to recognize the case still has no chance:

“There is a law against improperly using a person’s name without authorization and it wasn’t authorized.”

I’m curious (a) which law he’s talking about specifically and (b) how this was “improper use.” The account was clearly a parody (and said so in the bio). There was no implied endorsement of anything or other misuse of La Russa’s name. And, even if La Russa’s statement was true, the liability would certainly be on whoever created the account — not Twitter. While the details of what actually happened still aren’t clear… I’m guessing that after Twitter deleted the account, La Russa simply assumed they “settled.” Most likely, his lawyers will drop the lawsuit, but it would be interesting to see if Twitter pushes to keep the lawsuit in place in order to try to get a favorable ruling and use it to prevent other, similar, frivolous lawsuits.

Oh, and in the meantime, isn’t the Associated Press supposed to fact check things like “Tony La Russa and Twitter have reached a settlement in his lawsuit against the social networking site” and “Twitter has agreed to pay legal fees and make a donation to his Animal Rescue Foundation” both of which appear not to be true? The AP keeps telling us that only its “professional” journalists get things right — whereas those “amateur” bloggers out there screw up the news all the time. Or did the AP figure that it could get away with not fact checking, since it could just threaten to sue any blogger who quoted its erroneous report?

Filed Under: , , , ,
Companies: associated press, twitter

Rate this comment as insightful
Rate this comment as funny
You have rated this comment as insightful
You have rated this comment as funny
Flag this comment as abusive/trolling/spam
You have flagged this comment
The first word has already been claimed
The last word has already been claimed
Insightful Lightbulb icon Funny Laughing icon Abusive/trolling/spam Flag icon Insightful badge Lightbulb icon Funny badge Laughing icon Comments icon

Comments on “La Russa & The AP Claims Twitter Settled Lawsuit… Twitter Sets The Record Straight”

Subscribe: RSS Leave a comment
Anonymous Coward says:

Re: Fact Checkers

Err… what?

Papers have debt because they were trying to “return value to shareholders” through dividends and when debt was some how the financial fashion statement. Of course, that’s unrelated to the comment here.

How in the world is AP not to blame if the quote from the beginning goes like this:

“ST. LOUIS (AP) — St. Louis Cardinals manager Tony La Russa and Twitter have reached a settlement in his lawsuit against the social networking site.”

Note the letters in parenthesis.

Hulser (profile) says:

Re: Fact Checkers

Seems unfair to blame the AP in this case.

It seems perfectly fair to me. The product that the AP provides is accurate news. If the AP provides innacurate news, not only does their overall reputation and marketability decrease, but they’ve failed to provide a quality product which makes it perfectly fair to criticize them. Saying it’s unfair to criticize the AP for publishing erroneous information is like saying it’s unfair to blame St. Louis Cardinals when they lose a game.

Freedom says:

Re: Fact Checkers

>> The AP just passes along stories from their members. Seems unfair to blame the AP in this case

And hence the real problem with the AP – if all you do is pass around stories in the Internet Age, aren’t you pretty much irrelevant at this point then? Where is the value add in today’s Internet World for that?


Chronno S. Trigger (profile) says:

Re: I believe everything Twitter says but...

The person who setup the account was acting like the coach (talking about plays and how well he thought he did), not just some guy with the same name. This suggested (I’m not going to say proved since it still could have been him) that the person who setup the account wasn’t who he claimed to be. Thus the violation of the terms of service.

Prepare for a hacking charge next.

Justin Dessonville (profile) says:

Blame the driver not the car

Next time I get in a car accident. I’m going to sue the car manufacturer for making something that I could possibly get in an accident with.

Next time I search Google Images with Safe Search off and a topless woman shows up in my results, I’m going to sue Google.

Where’s the common sense? Thank you Twitter for standing your ground.

Anonymous Coward says:

Re: Blame the driver not the car

“Next time I get in a car accident. I’m going to sue the car manufacturer for making something that I could possibly get in an accident with”

Actually, people do that all the time and win. Showing that a product had a defect in it and was not corrected creates liability.

Twitter has knowingly created a system where anyone can take on the personality of a celeb and claim to be them, making false statements or otherwise causing harm. Knowing that this defect exists, Twitter hasn’t done anything to fix the issue, thus creating the potential for liabilty (under your example).

Anonymous Coward says:

You could run Twitter on SkyNet, and have it preemptively launch miss… er, delete accounts that it THINKS are violating terms of service. Because, you know, current servers cannot be made to think independently. Even so they would have to be up to date with all the current celebrities, so it would be a gossip machine. Interesting…

Gene Cavanaugh (profile) says:


Right on, Michael!
Recently an article (AP? Think so) by a “professional” journalist said (paraphrasing) “vitamins are useless”. The ScienceDaily article that was plagiarized from (even some of the same grammatical mistakes) went on to say “for heart attack prevention” and “known to be beneficial for other reasons”, etc. TOTALLY different result!!!
Professional? I don’t think so.

Add Your Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Have a Techdirt Account? Sign in now. Want one? Register here

Comment Options:

Make this the or (get credits or sign in to see balance) what's this?

What's this?

Techdirt community members with Techdirt Credits can spotlight a comment as either the "First Word" or "Last Word" on a particular comment thread. Credits can be purchased at the Techdirt Insider Shop »

Follow Techdirt

Techdirt Daily Newsletter

Techdirt Deals
Techdirt Insider Discord
The latest chatter on the Techdirt Insider Discord channel...