Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

The lawyer who is running the new lawsuit is Charles J Harder -- same guy who ran the 140M$ suit.

He is the protege of notorious legal "bulldog" Marty Singer

: http://popbitch.com/home/2015/01/16/the-full-marty/

 reds8n wrote:
The lawyer who is running the new lawsuit is Charles J Harder -- same guy who ran the 140M$ suit.

He is the protege of notorious legal "bulldog" Marty Singer

: http://popbitch.com/home/2015/01/16/the-full-marty/

That seems like a reputable source, no bias there!

 jreilly89 wrote:


I don't see the Times exploiting some Chinese billionaire's secrets. Context matters.

And they wouldn't have to. Thiel succeeded with a trial that wasn't even related to him and tried doing it many more times. That random billionaire just needs enough motivation to spend his money (the lawsuit doesn't need to be about them specifically) so the NYT spends money on lawyers. That's a template to abuse the legal system if you have more money than the entity you are attacking and, in the long run, it doesn't matter if they are right or wrong. Gawker outed him which was technically legal (but morally wrong) and the NYT or anybody else, for that matter, just needs to write an article somebody doesn't like (they did write about ultra rich Chinese and and how they profit from their country's economic boom at the cost of everybody else). It doesn't have to be worthy of a lawsuit but just motivate someone to retaliate. People from the US, for example, like to make fun of the UKs libel laws (for being anti free speech) but in turn have a system where somebody who has the money can relentlessly attack (and try to bankrupt) others if they are willing to spend it. Most smaller publications probably don't have the financial means to defend themselves against unending lawsuits.

Mario wrote:

 jreilly89 wrote:


I don't see the Times exploiting some Chinese billionaire's secrets. Context matters.

And they wouldn't have to. Thiel succeeded with a trial that wasn't even related to him and tried doing it many more times. That random billionaire just needs enough motivation to spend his money (the lawsuit doesn't need to be about them specifically) so the NYT spends money on lawyers. That's a template to abuse the legal system if you have more money than the entity you are attacking and, in the long run, it doesn't matter if they are right or wrong. Gawker outed him which was technically legal (but morally wrong) and the NYT or anybody else, for that matter, just needs to write an article somebody doesn't like (they did write about ultra rich Chinese and and how they profit from their country's economic boom at the cost of everybody else). It doesn't have to be worthy of a lawsuit but just motivate someone to retaliate. People from the US, for example, like to make fun of the UKs libel laws (for being anti free speech) but in turn have a system where somebody who has the money can relentlessly attack (and try to bankrupt) others if they are willing to spend it. Most smaller publications probably don't have the financial means to defend themselves against unending lawsuits.

That's not entirely true. Many states have good anti-SLAPP statutes (though we definitely need more). Once that's the case, filing frivolous lawsuits doesn't get you anywhere, and doesn't cost your target anything. In other words, your lawsuit still needs merit to proceed. There's nothing wrong with a billionaire funding other people's lawsuits as long as they have merit.