(April 19, 2018 at 3:10 pm)Joods Wrote:(April 19, 2018 at 5:11 am)CapnAwesome Wrote: I don't really see the difference, since this is a public forum, there is an audience even if it's not the same as Alex Jones., Think of the floodgates that would open if the family won. Everyone could be sued for conspiracy videos or even certain shit talking online.
They won't win though. So it doesn't really matter.
Also Alex Jones didn't make up this conspiracy. Someone else did and he's just promotes it. I mean why Jones? Is every YouTuber who promotes this, or 9/11 truther nonsense subject to lawsuit?
Yeah, if he didn't originally make this stuff up, then the families are technically going after the wrong party. They need to go after whomever started the conspiracy to begin with. This amounts to nothing more than shooting the messenger, which, in this case, as much as I loathe Jones, is a violation of his First Amendment rights.
That guy shouldn't be allowed a platform for the shit that he does, but if we take away his right to do that, then we might as well take away everyone's rights and abolish the First amendment all together. That amendment is there to ensure that everyone has a right to say what they want to say, within reason. If it offends some people - then those people will have to stay offended. Chances are, at some point in their lives, they too, have said something to offend someone else. No one is perfect.
Again - if Jones wasn't the originator, but just the catalyst, then there are no merits of this case that the family can win because they really have no ground to stand on. They need to place their suit with whom ever started this.
Well, the guy that said we were a a gang was really pushing against that incident. Jeez. In Portugal we don't make amendments to the constitution. We revise it, keeping the previous versions for keeps sake. Gonna have 75% of parliament to change anything, and in a 5 party dynamic (2 bigger, 3 smaller, but force compromise), that will be very hard to do lest dire need.
IMO, and here, slander is a thing. If you accuse someone publicly of a crime, you are burdened to present your evidence or lawyers will eat your ass. Accusing anyone of a crime without any proof is a crime here, it is not about free speech. You can say someone is an asswhole (not a crime here), but a sexual offender(crime), without proof of your allegations is slander, libel, etc. It is the right of the accused to be presented with the evidence, by Law. Publicly accusing others of a crime, without any evidence usually is a nice lawsuit here to pay.
