a few years ago, France made it illegal to say "podcast" on television or radio - they didn't like the English loaner word and insisted on "audio à la demande"
They're both too rich to be affected by a lawsuit outside of their ego, but with how SLAPP suit happy Rowling is, this is still funny. Hopefully she has a meltdown on twitter over it.
Her time will be massively wasted by it so that's a good thing one way or another. Even paying a bunch of people to handle it she'll still lose hundreds of hours.
But the actual point of these laws (in theory) is less about punishing someone for bad behavior and more about compensation or restitution for harm done to the plaintiff. It's just expressed in terms of currency or other compensation.
Basically like "Elon's targeted harassment has reduced the plaintiff's marketability for sponsorships and future post-career coaching opportunities..." stuff like that. And if he's found liable (or guilty, dunno how France words this stuff) he has to compensate for that measurable harm caused over a lifetime.
I'm not trying to be overly annoying, but it is one of those things I think people run away with like "oh time for the courts to punish them!" and because billionaires break the system due to the magnitude of their wealth in comparison to "reasonable" damages awards, it's always going to be disappointing if the expectation is "finally he'll learn to shut up!" Because he won't. Not under the current system. However, if the system works correctly, an innocent person can get something approaching justice on their end in financial terms.
i hope there's this thing where they have such massive and overpaid teams of lawyers that the sheer number of egos makes them effectively incompetent and unable to coordinate with each other and she takes a shit load of money from them (i guess whatever assets the French state can appropriate?)
It probably helps that those two have income from France. Elon bc Twitter operates in France and I’m pretty sure Teslas are sold there, Rowling bc Harry Potter shit is sold in France
An Algerian filing a complaint (unsure what that means here) in France against a Brit and a Yank, each of whom have companies registered in the EU (I think Tesla and Harry Potter have European subsidiaries) seems like lawyer hell.
For speech to be libel, it has to be false. However, medical records are private. Would Khelif have to forfeit her medical privacy to prove that their claims are false and therefore libelous? This seems confusing and I doubt she'd be willing to publish a DNA or testosterone test as she didn't go to the CAS after her '23 ban. Also, where's Lin in all of this? I'm surprised she wasn't the main target. None of this makes sense and I think the more I learn the less I'll understand.
This doesn't sound a case of libel, you can harass someone someone without using false statements so I'm not sure it would be relevant.
This seems confusing and I doubt she'd be willing to publish a DNA or testosterone test as she didn't go to the CAS after her '23 ban.
The organization that gave her the ban is no longer recognized by the IOC or CAS, so again not really relevant. Not really relevant either way, if you get false claims made against you by a corrupt organization you're not obligated to go after them privately or legally. Like I'm sorry, I'm not taking any claims by the IBA seriously.
As in to regain the ability to fight in IBA sanctioned matches. She did publish an appeal at the time of her ban, and the IBA was recognized but she withdrew the appeal.
Why wouldn't the burden of proof be on Musk, Dawkins, Raichik, and Rowling to prove they had a compelling reason to make the claim, aside from just vibes?
I only saw the Dawkins tweet, he was very specific and certain about his level of evidence, so much to use the term "undisputed".
Otherwise there's a chilling effect where women are all relentlessly bullied online until they publicize their medical records to prove they don't have abortions or alopecia or osteogelasia liquifaciens or w/e the new fearmongering is that week.
This is apparently a cyberbullying thing, not a libel thing. So after reading the French harassment laws, it doesn't matter if you said something entirely true or not. It just matters if the harassment is repeated and caused a decline in health and that you did it more than once. So Khelif doesn't need to prove anything, other than mean tweets made her sad.
On another note, I'm shocked that France has a law that says if you post more than one mean tweet about a politician you can go to prison for 3 years.