1363
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 01 Aug 2023
1363 points (95.0% liked)
Technology
59674 readers
3758 users here now
This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.
Our Rules
- Follow the lemmy.world rules.
- Only tech related content.
- Be excellent to each another!
- Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
- Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
- Politics threads may be removed.
- No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
- Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
- Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
Approved Bots
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
If they go to court, wouldn't the court make them prove that the claim was false or defamation? And if CCDH can prove that it's not false or defamation then now it's legal record that hate speech has increased since the takeover? This all seems ok with me.
That's not how the American court system works.
A company like Twitter can bleed the CCDH dry and just walk away with a frivolous lawsuit and a minor (insignificant) penalty.
And the way that works is not by accident.
In a defamation lawsuit, it would not be X that had to prove it was a lie. It would be CCDH that had to prove it had evidence for their claims (notice that it does not need to be true, only has to be reasonable for CCDH to believe it is true based on evidence they had).
They just have to prove that the CCDH's report was bad and was using incorrect information to slander twitter, which going by the CCDH's reports listed methodology would take all of 2 minutes.