Revealing the identity of someone who posted a tweet isn't a crime. It may be shitty (and pathetic) for an international news organization to use it as a threat to intimidate someone into not mocking them, but as far as I understand, you wouldn't really be able to sue them for it (well, you can sue anyone for anything, but I doubt you'd win that lawsuit).
What's even sadder is that people have to be worry about being publicly exposed as a Trump supporter. It's not like the guy posted an ISIS video or something... It was just a funny clip of Trump wrestling, with the CNN logo as his opponent... and yet, he was worried he'd lose his job if CNN exposed him. Basically for no other reason than being a Trump supporter. Everyone knows the excuse that "it promotes violence" is bullshit. It's cartoon violence, and it's obviously meant to be funny. It's not calling for someone to throw a brick through a window at CNN headquarters, like BLM did.
Seriously, most of the time some company or corporate entity pulls some bullshit ultimatum like that it is usually due to a weak position with few real options so they hope to intimidate.
We all know, based on their documented history, Comcast/CNN will ruthlessly use any legal avenues available to them. Do we really believe for one second that the people at CNN were worried about the kid's reputation and that's the reason they didn't name him? They really expect us to believe that?
Or just maybe you know that would open you up to liability as well, but are counting on me being intimidated and unaware of my true leverage due to a lack of experience and/or legal resources.
If you call them on it immediately and dare them to do it, or send out another video mocking their warning, then you put them in the position where they are forced to do something that will get them sued.
I'd actually start with a cease and desist from my attorney regarding the unwarranted harassment, listing specific threats against my client and their public attempts to extort and silence them on live television.
That way, you've officially warned them what they were doing was harming you and spelled it out for them so they can't claim ignorance. This is important when it comes to determining liability conclusively, and the first thing a legal team will claim as a defense against whatever you've accused them of doing, regardless of how ridiculous of a lie everyone in the courtroom knows it to be.
Once you do that, you've got a case that might get you paid. I certainly wouldn't take the knee.
If I was rich, as in had more to lose, I guess I could understand staying silent, even if I didn't like it. Don't want to judge the man.
Just wanted to write the above to show they may have had more options than they thought they did. They were just unaware and put into a pressure situation where they had to make a decision. I can certainly understand shutting up, I don't think I am impervious to the same emotions, under the right circumstance.
They blackmailed that kid. Told him if he did any shit like that again they would release his info. Scum.
I hope he is here making memes.
Could he not sue like wtf
Sounds like a payday for me and you are spending rest of your life on the beach in Hawaii posting memes
There's a hotdog stand I read people talk about in Hawaii
Revealing the identity of someone who posted a tweet isn't a crime. It may be shitty (and pathetic) for an international news organization to use it as a threat to intimidate someone into not mocking them, but as far as I understand, you wouldn't really be able to sue them for it (well, you can sue anyone for anything, but I doubt you'd win that lawsuit).
What's even sadder is that people have to be worry about being publicly exposed as a Trump supporter. It's not like the guy posted an ISIS video or something... It was just a funny clip of Trump wrestling, with the CNN logo as his opponent... and yet, he was worried he'd lose his job if CNN exposed him. Basically for no other reason than being a Trump supporter. Everyone knows the excuse that "it promotes violence" is bullshit. It's cartoon violence, and it's obviously meant to be funny. It's not calling for someone to throw a brick through a window at CNN headquarters, like BLM did.
I'd go full force. Call CNN on their bluff.
I'd then sue the fuck out. THere would be plenty of lawyers wanting to take that case.
Seriously, most of the time some company or corporate entity pulls some bullshit ultimatum like that it is usually due to a weak position with few real options so they hope to intimidate.
We all know, based on their documented history, Comcast/CNN will ruthlessly use any legal avenues available to them. Do we really believe for one second that the people at CNN were worried about the kid's reputation and that's the reason they didn't name him? They really expect us to believe that?
Or just maybe you know that would open you up to liability as well, but are counting on me being intimidated and unaware of my true leverage due to a lack of experience and/or legal resources.
If you call them on it immediately and dare them to do it, or send out another video mocking their warning, then you put them in the position where they are forced to do something that will get them sued.
I'd actually start with a cease and desist from my attorney regarding the unwarranted harassment, listing specific threats against my client and their public attempts to extort and silence them on live television.
That way, you've officially warned them what they were doing was harming you and spelled it out for them so they can't claim ignorance. This is important when it comes to determining liability conclusively, and the first thing a legal team will claim as a defense against whatever you've accused them of doing, regardless of how ridiculous of a lie everyone in the courtroom knows it to be.
Once you do that, you've got a case that might get you paid. I certainly wouldn't take the knee.
If I was rich, as in had more to lose, I guess I could understand staying silent, even if I didn't like it. Don't want to judge the man.
Just wanted to write the above to show they may have had more options than they thought they did. They were just unaware and put into a pressure situation where they had to make a decision. I can certainly understand shutting up, I don't think I am impervious to the same emotions, under the right circumstance.
Wish I could save this post
Hold on to your hat Pede, we fucking can!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
I'd ask to appear on live tv to apologize and BTFO them live like bill o'reilly