In a blistering 52-page order, the judge blasted X’s case as plainly punitive rather than about protecting the platform’s security and legal rights. “Sometimes it is unclear what is driving a litigation,” wrote District Judge Charles Breyer, of the US District Court for the Northern District of California, in the order’s opening lines. “Other times, a complaint is so unabashedly and vociferously about one thing that there can be no mistaking that purpose.
is an international non-profit with offices in the UK and US. Because of its potential to destroy the watchdog group, the case has been widely viewed as a bellwether for research and accountability on X as Musk has welcomed back prominent white supremacists and others to the platform who had previously been suspended when the platform was still a publicly-traded company called Twitter. In December, for example, Musk restored the X account of conspiracy theorist Alex Jones, who lost a $1.
to spend more time and money defending itself before it can hope to get out from under this potentially ruinous litigation,” he wrote. He added it would be “wrong” to let X amend its suit “when the damages it now alleges, and the damages it would like to allege, are so problematic, and when X Corp.’s motivation is so clear.” To fight the allegations,
’s publications were defamatory, that would be one thing, but X Corp. has carefully avoided saying that they are,” Breyer wrote. He added that X “wishes to have it both ways,” trying to impose “punishing damages” on
United States Latest News, United States Headlines
Similar News:You can also read news stories similar to this one that we have collected from other news sources.
Source: ALNewsNetwork - 🏆 583. / 51 Read more »
Source: FOX4 - 🏆 289. / 63 Read more »
Source: NPR - 🏆 96. / 63 Read more »
Source: verge - 🏆 94. / 67 Read more »
Source: mercnews - 🏆 88. / 68 Read more »
Source: KPBSnews - 🏆 240. / 63 Read more »