Can You Name Which Las Vegas Billionaire Casino Owner, Who Recently Lost A SLAPP Suit, Wants To Destroy Nevada's Anti-SLAPP Law?
from the or-is-there-more-than-one dept
Last week, we had a brief post on the disturbing news that Nevada’s very good and very useful anti-SLAPP law was about to be destroyed by a new bill that basically gutted all of the important stuff in Nevada’s bill. This would be pretty tragic, as anti-SLAPP laws are important in protecting free speech — especially in protecting the free speech of those who challenge the wealthy and powerful. As you may know, there are a lot of wealthy and powerful people in Nevada, and it may be difficult to figure out which of them stand to benefit the most from killing off a law that prevents them from using hoards of cash to silence critics.
In the comments to our post, someone noted that casino billionaire Sheldon Adelson recently lost a defamation case thanks to Nevada’s anti-SLAPP law and was told to pay up the legal fees of the guy he sued. Adelson is also pretty well-known for well-financed efforts for political causes he believes in. So that makes him a rather obvious choice. But over on his blog, Marc Randazza points the finger at a different Las Vegas casino-owning billionaire: Steve Wynn, arguing that Wynn also just lost a defamation lawsuit, thanks to California’s anti-SLAPP law. Randazza points to some evidence tying a top Wynn lawyer/lobbyist, to the new effort.
And all I can think is, what is it about Las Vegas billionaire casino developer/owners that makes them so thin-skinned as to sue critics to try to silence their free speech?
Filed Under: anti-slapp, free speech, nevada, sheldon adelson, slapp, steve wynn
Comments on “Can You Name Which Las Vegas Billionaire Casino Owner, Who Recently Lost A SLAPP Suit, Wants To Destroy Nevada's Anti-SLAPP Law?”
billionair idiots twits and dumb mothers heads
all billionairs should shut up and go away forever, they are a persistent drain on the economy and are the ones directly responsible for devalueing all workers by bringing in HB1 visa holders who are worthless compared to local talent but are getting all the jobs and local highly educated talent is going unemployed or not working in their area of expertise. what is up with this stupid demographic of self serving arseholes. fuck them all.
they are all cuntholes
fucking stupid fucking dumb cunts of cuntholes and cunts. cunt off
suffering from affluence sounds like.
Thin skin
Typically, billionaires are thin skinned for one of two reasons. Either their mommy didn’t love them enough, or their mommy loved them too much.
Billionnaire ?
There is still billionnaire at las vegas ?
Oh wait…
I suppose Sheldon Adelson has to do something in his spare time when he’s not bending GOP* candidates to his will…
*Yes, we all know there are billionaires that back Dem candidates as well. But Adelson is the subject of this article.
New Irish Blessing: May you never have to stay in a Steve Wynn Hotel. I heard this years ago and now I know why.
And all I can think is, what is it about Las Vegas billionaire casino developer/owners that makes them so thin-skinned as to sue critics to try to silence their free speech?
I would guess it’s been so long since anyone told them no that they feel it must be illegal if someone says anything bad about them.
While I’m glad Mike is covering this, I wish he’d referenced commentary from someone other than Marc “Negligent Router” Randazza. https://www.techdirt.com/blog/wireless/articles/20110801/04233815344/no-having-open-wifi-does-not-make-you-negligent-liable-10000.shtml
It’s like that old saying, if you don’t like the law, buy a new one.
Wait, that isn’t an old saying? Are you saying you can’t buy your own laws?
That’s a bummer.
Re: Re:
I’m not sure if privately owned casinos should even be legal. While I’m generally a fan of free market capitalism it seems like these casinos get rich by preying on the intellectually naive and use that money to defy democracy by buying laws that defy free market capitalism. If we are to allow casinos to exist perhaps they should be government ran and the proceeds put back to the general fund (and while governments are also known to squander money inefficiently this might still be a better solution than allowing a private owner to obtain such easy money).
Re: Re:
Of course you can buy your own laws.
The content industry and big pharma have been buying laws for a while now (extensions to copyright, changes to the patent system), these billionaires just need to play the game… buy some politicians, buy some lobbyists, they can get their own.
If all else fails they just need to be part of a trade agreement, and they can write laws for most of the world and won’t even have to put up with the little people reading and complaining about it until it’s signed into law.
Re: Re: Re:
Wow… rich people are really… what’s that word? Oh yeah, entitled.
They cry murder whenever someone “below” them makes a mistake, but when they do it “It’s all good, I’m RICH!”.
@7:46pm:
also laws to have harmful additives unbanned, preventing bans on existing harmful additives (because they keep profits up).
The current economic recession has become a golden opportunity for the rich to buy even more power in exchange for the promise of (temporary) jobs.