the only issue i ever had with section 230 is that companies like backpage and others were using it to allow traffickers to post ads online of underage girls. while backpage and craigslist would reap millions off of these ads, (and in backpage's case was found guilty of helping to facilitate these traffickers), backpage would exploit 230 to make millions
Have any of those accounts defamed the plaintiff? I don’t know. But if they are working or communicating with the person being sued, than yea, it totally makes sense why they’d be subpoenaed
I have no idea. But read the plaintiffs statement: “ Any and all actions taken are when and where irrefutable evidence exists of an individual’s participation in the almost four-year smear operation.”
They must have evidence. Has anyone done a search to see if the defendant communicates or includes Adam or any of the other accounts in defaming fitzy?
ESP towards the end: “ Any and all actions taken are when and where irrefutable evidence exists of an individual’s participation in the almost four-year smear operation.
To my critics who believe that my actions are unwarranted, I kindly suggest they may feel differently if they found themselves as the target.”
Techdirt has not posted any stories submitted by ScottJohnson.
the only issue i ever had with section 230 is that companies like backpage and others were using it to allow traffickers to post ads online of underage girls. while backpage and craigslist would reap millions off of these ads, (and in backpage's case was found guilty of helping to facilitate these traffickers), backpage would exploit 230 to make millions
Re:
Excuse me? Ha! You’ve got the wrong horse Stevie
Re:
Have any of those accounts defamed the plaintiff? I don’t know. But if they are working or communicating with the person being sued, than yea, it totally makes sense why they’d be subpoenaed
Re:
I have no idea. But read the plaintiffs statement: “ Any and all actions taken are when and where irrefutable evidence exists of an individual’s participation in the almost four-year smear operation.” They must have evidence. Has anyone done a search to see if the defendant communicates or includes Adam or any of the other accounts in defaming fitzy?
When have attorneys not been able to subpoena?
This seems to shed light https://medium.com/@TrevorFitzgibb1/a-statement-ed4be1023fe1
ESP towards the end: “ Any and all actions taken are when and where irrefutable evidence exists of an individual’s participation in the almost four-year smear operation.
To my critics who believe that my actions are unwarranted, I kindly suggest they may feel differently if they found themselves as the target.”