[Resolved] Domain Registrar & Epik's Seizure

[Colonel Gaddafi]

I can send a money order. They can go ahead and cancel me, they’ll have to come here first. Me and the boys will be happy to meet them on the rooftop of the Radisson Blu in Tripoli.

 

[MarMar049]

We still have TOR, fuck the clearnet.

TOR is slow as shit and fucking DEAD when it's the only option.

 

[break these cuffs]

God I hope this fucking lawsuit comes to reality so all of these fucking dipshit retards like Christopher "Vito" Gesualdi, Alejandro Caraballo, Keffals, Liz-Dong-Gone and everyone who has ever lied about this Forum to try and destroy it gets completely fucking owned.

Anyone who is against the concept of a lawsuit doesn't understand that this sets a precedent that companies cannot just fucking take down websites over lies and get away with it, no matter how controversial they may be. Nothing illegal = no takedown.

The problem is that the courts never fail to disappoint. Follow suits featured on the site and you'll see just how rampant legal faggotry is. Most recently the whole debacle in the Russ case. There is no guarantee no matter how slamdunk something is supposed to be and defamation cases are never slam dunks. That being said, he's gotta take his shot at some point. I'm good for a couple bills to the warchest to kick things off.

 

[Type93Torpedo]

New user blocks don't prevent trannies from resurrecting their old sock accounts. This is literally what happened a year or two ago with the keffals/cloudflare debacle. Some faggot logged into an old sock, fedposted, then submitted it to cloudflare as proof that the site is full of mouth-foaming tranny murdering psychopaths even though the post got jannied 30 minutes later.

Unfortunate. I can’t really see a way to protect against this then, unless you go full schizo and disable all uploads until the lawsuit is finished.

I'd imagine in cases like this, Josh could just point to the fact that the post was made after the xeet so it couldn't be admitted as evidence for the second claim. Whats far more likely is that they'll just find some "questionable" image in an old thread and make a claim that it was what they were referring to.

Wouldn’t this just dig their grave deeper if the court found that it’s not CSAM? I’m not a legal expert, so forgive my retardness.

 

[Kalsarikännit]

finance litigation?

YES!

If there's any time to catch a domain registry with their pants down, it's right now.

 

[Don't Tread on Me]

Because it's death by a thousand cuts. We never went after the lies about us being a tranny murder forum and now major print newspapers accuse us of literally killing people, which then gets scrawled on the wiki page. Accusing us of hosting CP is simply the next escalation in the lies.

At a certain point you have to do something to defend your reputation, or else it won't matter anymore what the truth is. And if we get a reputation for being a CP den, shit will just get even harder for the forum in the long run. An accusation like that HAS to be challenged.

Yes it HAS to be challenged. For 75 grand. 75 grand you will never see again, win or lose.

 

[Joshuan Moon]

What about all the other sites that slandered and defamed Josh and the farms over the years? Each one just parrots the other, but they do so on their own websites with their own content moderation teams. Why have they not been sued? Seems to me that it would be easier to win a defamation case against WaPo or BuzzFeed, or similar propaganda outlets than against a single retard on Xeeter.

Defamation is never clear cut, even when it is. But in this case the xitter user isn't just some random schlub, it's an agent spokesperson for Epik. When he speaks he speaks with the voice of his employer. The statement is an unambiguous statement of fact that can be easily proven or disproven, just because it's being played off as a joke after the fact doesn't make it not a binary true/false. The statement concerns an unconscionable criminal act making it defamation per se. The statement implies direct knowledge of the alleged truth of the statement so can't just claim to be repeating what someone else said.

Prior to this point the defamation was mostly from randos doing it publically but small impact or carefully worded to arguable. Or it was privately such that you couldn't prove it without discovery and you need proof to get to that point. The journalists have just been repeating what other people have said and journalists get special protection due to the freedom of the press.

Since Epik had a customer relationship their claims bear more weight as they would have had the means to know what was stated was false and since they're part of industry their false statements can be especially prejudicial to others in the industry. It would be difficult to fight against the bad reputation even in this case. Just because someone has a bad reputation doesn't mean anything bad you say isn't actionable defamation. Example, calling OJ a killer wouldn't be defamation because it's a widespread belief, but calling him a child rapist probably would be, even with the negative reputation he has.

The more likely outcome is that they end up retracting the statements and put a more sane person in their place. A public retraction is as good or better than any win in a lolsuit.

 

[Al from Dadeville]

I can throw down 1 thousand doll hairs

 

[Captain Wetbeard]

Where do I donate

https://kiwifarms.st/threads/supporting-the-forum.27022/

 

[Top Skink]

I'M DOING MY PART!

JOIN TODAY!

 

[Absurdist Laughter]

Just in time for Tax Return season.

 

[Lifeguard Hermit]

1. Epik allows this horseshit
2. waits for us to waste money
3. they fire some nonexistent social media manager
4. ?????
5. trannies win again
this feels really targeted but not in the way its presented.
I would almost send them a CnD to see what they do: or if they are even aware of what an actual individual is doing while on the clock.
this is the main reason montyfag is forcing rackets to let his lawyer take him to the cleaners: this kind of statement is literally the thing that makes a judge go "fuck this guy".
I promise you racket's judge is letting his case progress just because rackets should have known better. Especially as a lawyer.
Tl;Dr social media managers only training they receive is legal constraint shit like this, something smells like a rat but its also totally actionable imo given rackets circumstances
ps: even if they pull it now bc they didnt know someone was doing it: its still out there via a known corporate entity and thats basically a slam dunk. its an outright admission of guilt.

 

[Eddie Gluskin]

I'll throw you a 20, as per usual when I want something.

 

[TV's Adam West]

I've already donated crypto once to laugh at retards.
I'll donate again to ensure a survival for laughing at retards.

 

[Rain Team Pepe]

Total litigation war!

 

[mindlessobserver]

Yes it HAS to be challenged. For 75 grand. 75 grand you will never see again, win or lose.

Probably more then that if it doesn't settle. 75 grand is a good ball park number to convince a law firm to go to bat for you, and should cover initial complaints, motions and discovery. Getting it through Jury trial will probably take another 75 grand easy, and this is on the cheap end.

 

[Big Spencer's Top Man]

After lurking for several years on this website, I created an account for the sole purpose of telling you that I'll chip in. I luv u Josh.

 

[Male Idiot]

Just please don't hire Nick or anyone whom Nick recommends, for the love of Chris.

 

[SomethingFishi]

Yeah, fuck these faggots. They need to learn that lying about this site isn't free anymore.

 

[NoReturn]

What if I just put cash in an envelope and leave it at Mount Rushmore? Would that work?