Musk's defamation win may reset legal landscape for social media

[Mick501]

1 hour ago, MeePeeMai said:

 

Let's see, I recall that Musk built and shipped a mini-sub to the cave in an attempt to assist in getting the boys out alive.  Although he was unaware of the conditions that they faced with regards to the confined space and the  tight squeezes (rendering the mini-sub unusable in the particular case), it was Vernon who publicly laughed at Musk, told him his sub was worthless and then told Musk to "Stick your sub where the sun don't shine."

 

What effect did this have on Musk's reputation... as you put it - "Losing your good name could have all sorts of implications, including employment, investments, being boycotted".

 

I think that Musk was simply returning the favor, although I think he could have done a much better job than just calling him a pedo. 

 

Not sure about the accuracy or otherwise of this comment, but isn't it a little odd that he wouldn't just call first and see if it may be of use?

[Sheryl]

8 hours ago, ukrules said:

Vern should appeal this result.

I don't think a plaintiff can appeal.  Defendants can if the verdict goes against them but not plaintiff.  Unfortunately.

 

Had it been decided by judge rather than jury I think outcome would have differed.

[wwest5829]

What was the thinking. Should have brought suit in Thailand. Stricter outlook on defamation and combined with the cave refuse connection ...

[theonetrueaussie]

2 hours ago, Pedrogaz said:

Since he was interested in the money initially he should have pursued his case in Thailand where defamation is a criminal offense and distributing over the internet carries a prison term. Musk may well not have shown up but Unsworth may have had a victory in absentia.

because even if they found musk guilty in thailand, No western court would recognize it nor would they enforce any judgement based on a "defamation" ruling in thailand!!

As long as musk never stepped foot in thailand there would then be no way to enforce any judgement that was given in a thai court!

[Baerboxer]

8 hours ago, Samui Bodoh said:

An interesting article, and one that is likely true.

 

Where is the new limit for libel? Can you say...

 

"Donald Trump is an <deleted> <deleted> <deleted> <deleted> <deleted>"?

 

"Elon Musk is <deleted> <deleted> <deleted> <deleted>"?

 

"Boris Johnson is <deleted> <deleted> <deleted> <deleted> <deleted>"?

 

"Britney Spears is <deleted> <deleted> <deleted> <deleted> <deleted>"?

 

"Xi Jin Ping is <deleted> <deleted> <deleted> <deleted> <deleted>"?

 

"The Pope is a <deleted> <deleted> <deleted> <deleted> <deleted>"?

 

"Adele is a <deleted> <deleted> <deleted> <deleted> <deleted>"?

 

"God is <deleted> <deleted> <deleted> <deleted> <deleted>"?

 

And, if not, why not?

 

 

 

 

It seems you can post anything you like on Twitter - well according to a Californian jury.

 

Wouldn't test that theory in Thailand though!

 

It will be interesting to see what happens when an African-American and/or member of the LGBT community takes offense to a social media insult.

[Baerboxer]

1 minute ago, theonetrueaussie said:

because even if they found musk guilty in thailand, No western court would recognize it nor would they enforce any judgement based on a "defamation" ruling in thailand!!

 

I seriously doubt any countries would enforce a California courts judgement either.

[MeePeeMai]

37 minutes ago, Mick501 said:

Not sure about the accuracy or otherwise of this comment, but isn't it a little odd that he wouldn't just call first and see if it may be of use?

 

I think Elon was unaware that there were some very tight spaces that the divers had to navigate through to reach the boys and assumed that his little mini-sub could be used to bring one boy out at a time through the flooded areas.  I don't think there was a call made prior to Elon building the sub but I'm not sure.  Had Elon had all the facts he would have known that his sub was too large for them to use without widening the openings (which he may have assumed was a possibility). 

[Burma Bill]

Interesting, so now we can make as many derogatory remarks about Elon Musk and where he can stuff his electric cars and sky rockets!!

[zydeco]

1 minute ago, Burma Bill said:

Interesting, so now we can make as many derogatory remarks about Elon Musk and where he can stuff his electric cars and sky rockets!!

Newsflash! That already happens each and every day. And nobody gets sued.

[Krataiboy]

9 hours ago, Samui Bodoh said:

An interesting article, and one that is likely true.

 

Where is the new limit for libel? Can you say...

 

"Donald Trump is an <deleted> <deleted> <deleted> <deleted> <deleted>"?

 

"Elon Musk is <deleted> <deleted> <deleted> <deleted>"?

 

"Boris Johnson is <deleted> <deleted> <deleted> <deleted> <deleted>"?

 

"Britney Spears is <deleted> <deleted> <deleted> <deleted> <deleted>"?

 

"Xi Jin Ping is <deleted> <deleted> <deleted> <deleted> <deleted>"?

 

"The Pope is a <deleted> <deleted> <deleted> <deleted> <deleted>"?

 

"Adele is a <deleted> <deleted> <deleted> <deleted> <deleted>"?

 

"God is <deleted> <deleted> <deleted> <deleted> <deleted>"?

 

And, if not, why not?

 

 

 

I haven't seen the original Musk tweet, and I am no expert in US law, but prima facie this seems an extraordinary decision - with implications for the MSM as well as social media.

 

Perhaps the law is different in the US, but under UK as I recall it libel defence requires evidence that (a) the words used were true and (b) their revelation was in the public interest.

 

Mr Musk did not, apparently, have to meet either - let alone both - of  these criteria. His victory, achieved by labelling his insult as "opinion", is a defeat for common sense and potential disaster for vulnerable individuals and groups at the sharp end of hate speech.

 

One can only pray this aberrant version of justice does not cross the Pond.

 

 

 

 

[GinBoy2]

22 minutes ago, zydeco said:

Newsflash! That already happens each and every day. And nobody gets sued.

Exactly.

 

If the numbnuts, had just ignored it like 99.99% of tweets are, it would have been a non issue and faded into obscurity.

 

But no, this was a rich guy, and he figured he could make a buck or two, or in this case $190M!

 

The only reason he took the case forward in the US was that had they found in his favor the award would have been many times that had he pursued the case in Thailand.

 

Defamation means it has in some way damaged you, not just calling you names.

 

If that were the case half of TVF members would be sued.

 

Two grown men throwing insults at each other does not defamation make!

[DrTuner]

Back in the good old days people had what was called a thick skin. None of this millenial crybaby <deleted>. I think the world need a good bitchslap, still remnants of PC left even after Trump heroically demolished most if that idiocy.

[sirineou]

7 minutes ago, DrTuner said:

Back in the good old days people had what was called a thick skin. None of this millenial crybaby <deleted>. I think the world need a good bitchslap, still remnants of PC left even after Trump heroically demolished most if that idiocy.

Yes indeed they did not go around overreacting over every little comment.

 

[Artisi]

The whole court  case was a s h I t fight thanks to the stupidity of V I's legal team, should have settled for 1m and been happy. 

[IAMHERE]

I thought Musk wanted to stick the sub into the cave, where the sun don't shine. 

[mrfill]

10 hours ago, doremifasol said:

 

The name of the lawyer is Chip Babcock.

This can't be serious..........

 

 

If he was married to Peggy, I bet you can't say her full name 3 times quickly....

[JHolmesJr]

All I can say is Elon better not try his tweets on Thaivisa.

 

[Monomial]

13 hours ago, OneMoreFarang said:

Let's not forget that this trial was in the USA.

I am sure in many other countries the verdict would have been very different.

 

I don't think it's a huge issue if one person insults another. I.e. if I say person X is an idiot or he calls me an idiot that is nothing special and nobody assumes anybody tested the IQ first to make such a statement.

 

But there are other insults which are more than just a bad word. I.e. if someone calls someone else criminal, wife-beater,  kiddy-fiddler, murderer, rapist, these words have a clear meaning and accusing people any of this is not just everyday banter. 

 

The problem is they are only more than a bad word if people understand them to be genuine accusations. Language changes, and usage of words changes with it. There was a time in the past if you called a woman an old crone it meant she was wise. Try that today and I don't think you'll get a positive response. If they are just name calling using unflattering descriptions in the heat of a childish argument, then it doesn't really rise to the level of something you can claim is libel.  Much depends on the context, and whether there was any real damage done.

 

In Vernon's case, nobody genuinely believed Musk that he was a pedophile. It was not obvious that Musk's comments were an accusation, and even the jurors who spoke up after the case stated that the plaintiff needed to spend more time factually showing the real damage rather than just making an emotional plea.

 

I'm not saying what Musk did was nice or correct, and I think everyone agrees that none of us want to be called a kiddy fiddler, but in the context of this case it just didn't rise to level of libel. 

 

[sanemax]

8 minutes ago, Monomial said:

 

 

 

In Vernon's case, nobody genuinely believed Musk that he was a pedophile. It was not obvious that Musk's comments were an accusation, and even the jurors who spoke up after the case stated that the plaintiff needed to spend more time factually showing the real damage rather than just making an emotional plea.

 

I'm not saying what Musk did was nice or correct, and I think everyone agrees that none of us want to be called a kiddy fiddler, but in the context of this case it just didn't rise to level of libel. 

 

Many posters here on TVF thought "no smoke without fire" and because Musk made the statement, then there must be some truth to it .

  No one could definatley say that Musks allegations were untrue , I would say the majority of people thought there must be some truth to the allegations and only a few would have thought that there were absolutely no truth in the allegations 

[Krataiboy]

One wonders, in these politically-correct times, whether the jury would have jumped the same way if the target of the "pedo guy" taunt had been a certain religious prophet who married a nine-year-old.

 

Well, justice IS supposed to be blind. . . 

 

 

 

[HHTel]

Regarding legal costs, I guess Unsworth probably had a 'no win' 'no fee' basis. However, the judge can still award him Musk's costs!

UK proceedings are pending and being prepared.

There is also talk of suing him in Thailand.

The huge claim of 190 mill came from the lawyers. Initially, Unsworth was suing for 70K being the minimum to get to court.

I gather the defence was that as Unsworth is respected throughout the world, his reputation remains intact and as such he wasn't defamed! Also the reputation of Thailand and the sex industry was considered reasonable background for the comments from Musk.

N.B. One of the jurors owns two Tesla cars.

[OffshoreMig]

20 hours ago, ukrules said:

Vern should appeal this result.

He should quit while his is ahead  Did the court award costs?  what does "Pedo" mean?   Vern's comment precluding to Musk's response was disingenuous.   190 Million yeah right,  How did he come up with that sum?    Where is the error of law?  You can not just appeal seeking  second hearing.  Why did he not file his claim in the UK or Thailand?

[mike787]

20 hours ago, Chazar said:

Bad  news for  all those poor  easily  offended  snowflake  generation ..........good

Chazar is right....time people grew some BIG stones and sucked it up.  Imagine if every guy got offended and sued for such rhetoric the courts would be flooded.  Let it go...find better ways to use your income and time. 

[OneMoreFarang]

8 hours ago, Monomial said:

 

The problem is they are only more than a bad word if people understand them to be genuine accusations. Language changes, and usage of words changes with it. There was a time in the past if you called a woman an old crone it meant she was wise. Try that today and I don't think you'll get a positive response. If they are just name calling using unflattering descriptions in the heat of a childish argument, then it doesn't really rise to the level of something you can claim is libel.  Much depends on the context, and whether there was any real damage done.

 

In Vernon's case, nobody genuinely believed Musk that he was a pedophile. It was not obvious that Musk's comments were an accusation, and even the jurors who spoke up after the case stated that the plaintiff needed to spend more time factually showing the real damage rather than just making an emotional plea.

 

I'm not saying what Musk did was nice or correct, and I think everyone agrees that none of us want to be called a kiddy fiddler, but in the context of this case it just didn't rise to level of libel. 

 

Thanks for your reply. In part I agree with what you write. I see a couple of issues:

1.) Musk used that word for an old guy in Thailand who was actively involved in rescuing lots of young boys. Unfortunately there are not seldom news about Thailand from old guys and young boys which are very negative. So Musk's comment must also be seen with that connection in mind. And that IMHO makes it an accusation.

2.) Musk repeated that same accusation in further tweets and at least in one email to a journalist. He could have used other swear words but he didn't. He always used words with the same meaning - kiddy fiddler.

3.) And last but not least Musk hired someone to investigate him. And its seems the idea about that investigation was finding out what kind of relation Unsworth had with kids. Now why would he start such an investigation if it was just an everyday insult?

[mikebell]

19 hours ago, billd766 said:

Whilst it took place in Thailand, the court was in the USA under USA rules and regulations.

I did say corruption thrives here in Thailand.  I was aware about the US venue but was making the point that libel litigation HERE keeps the corrupt in power. Telling the truth HERE is no defence in a libel case.

[MarcB]

Maybe the reason of the trial being held in the USA, is that the payout would me much higher....

He could have much easier gone to Thai court, where the incident took place?

Or the the UK even, because he is a national there.

But he chose the US, hoping to gain a larger piece of the pie for a BS claim.

Greedy pedo

[atyclb]

unsworth might try suing musk alleging thanks to him (unsworth) musk is making money selling his sub to treat hemorrhoids thus stole his idea.

[doremifasol]

On 12/8/2019 at 4:48 PM, mrfill said:

If he was married to Peggy, I bet you can't say her full name 3 times quickly....

 

You are right, but I can say "if you have nothing to say say nothing" three times quickly.....