Submitted via IRC for TheMightyBuzzard
As you likely know, for most of the past nine months, we've been dealing with a defamation lawsuit from Shiva Ayyadurai, who claims to have invented email. This is a claim that we have disputed at great length and in great detail, showing how email existed long before Ayyadurai wrote his program. We pointed to the well documented public history of email, and how basically all of the components that Ayyadurai now claims credit for preceded his own work. We discussed how his arguments were, at best, misleading, such as arguing that the copyright on his program proved that he was the "inventor of email" -- since patents and copyrights are very different, and just because Microsoft has a copyright on "Windows" it does not mean it "invented" the concept of a windowed graphical user interface (because it did not). As I have said, a case like this is extremely draining -- especially on an emotional level -- and can create massive chilling effects on free speech.
A few hours ago, the judge ruled and we prevailed. The case has been dismissed and the judge rejected Ayyadurai's request to file an amended complaint. We are certainly pleased with the decision and his analysis, which notes over and over again that everything that we stated was clearly protected speech, and the defamation (and other claims) had no merit. This is, clearly, a big win for the First Amendment and free speech -- especially the right to call out and criticize a public figure such as Shiva Ayyadurai, who is now running for the US Senate in Massachusetts. We're further happy to see the judge affirm that CDA Section 230 protects us from being sued over comments made on the blog, which cannot be attributed to us under the law. We talk a lot about the importance of CDA 230, in part because it protects sites like our own from these kinds of lawsuits. This is just one more reason we're so concerned about the latest attempt in Congress to undermine CDA 230. While those supporting the bill may claim that it only targets sites like Backpage, such changes to CDA 230 could have a much bigger impact on smaller sites like our own.
(Score: 4, Insightful) by DannyB on Thursday September 07 2017, @03:29PM (10 children)
According to Ars Technica [arstechnica.com], his lawyer says he's going to appeal.
Because Shiva Ayyadurai is such a believer in free speech. What about TechDirt's free speech? Especially when everything TD said is true.
The lower I set my standards the more accomplishments I have.
(Score: 3, Insightful) by requerdanos on Thursday September 07 2017, @05:07PM (3 children)
The above is all true; in fact, it's the reason for the court decision against the abusive litigant and all-around-lying-scum Ayyadurai.
(Score: 2) by NewNic on Thursday September 07 2017, @06:26PM (2 children)
No, actually, I think you will find that false speech is also protected.
lib·er·tar·i·an·ism ˌlibərˈterēənizəm/ noun: Magical thinking that useful idiots mistake for serious political theory
(Score: 2) by requerdanos on Thursday September 07 2017, @06:41PM
Your point is well taken.
(Score: 2) by FatPhil on Friday September 08 2017, @12:49PM
Great minds discuss ideas; average minds discuss events; small minds discuss people; the smallest discuss themselves
(Score: 2) by DeathMonkey on Thursday September 07 2017, @05:23PM (4 children)
Dud loves free speech so much he wants to make your email client illegal!
(Score: 5, Insightful) by DannyB on Thursday September 07 2017, @05:40PM (3 children)
I don't think he wants to make anyone email client illegal. (Although I hear he is, in actual fact, running for office.)
I think he merely wants there to be enough free speech for everyone to know that he, and only he, invented email. But not so much free speech that anyone could refute his claim to having invented email. That seems like a fair place to draw the line before we overstep and have too much free speech on our hands. Or too much liberty.
The lower I set my standards the more accomplishments I have.
(Score: 2) by DeathMonkey on Thursday September 07 2017, @05:56PM (2 children)
I thought he was looking for licensing fees when this whole thing started a few years ago. Maybe I'm miss-remembering...
(Score: 2) by DannyB on Thursday September 07 2017, @07:00PM
I could also be mis-remembering.
The lower I set my standards the more accomplishments I have.
(Score: 2) by Nuke on Thursday September 07 2017, @07:36PM
No, he is looking for damages.
(Score: 2) by tangomargarine on Thursday September 07 2017, @07:23PM
Oh look, yet another person who claims to be pro-free speech, yet the first time somebody says something they don't like, they're trying to quash it.
Bunch of fucking hypocrites.
"Is that really true?" "I just spent the last hour telling you to think for yourself! Didn't you hear anything I said?"