Originally posted by Adam_PoE
Who is enraged? The progressives here responded with a collective shrug. Nobody cares. Well, except for the conservatives chimping out over it like they actually won a settlement themselves.
Reality: They invested themselves into this deeply, they were expecting this to go to court and that a jury would have publicly awarded Sandmann hundreds and hundreds of millions over a lawsuit that amounts to his feelings being hurt, making it a landmark case against their dreaded “the leftist media!”
Instead it happened behind closed doors, people don’t know how much he got and Sandmann signed an NDA and now has to worry that if he ever tells anyone or is secretly recorded bragging about it, he could be sued himself.
to;dr this wasn’t the epic outcome they were hoping for, so they are indeed “chimping”
Originally posted by Robtard
Reality: They invested themselves into this deeply, they were expecting this to go to court and that a jury would have publicly awarded Sandmann hundreds and hundreds of millions over a lawsuit that amounts to his feelings being hurt, making it a landmark case against their dreaded “the leftist media!”Instead it happened behind closed doors, people don’t know how much he got and Sandmann signed an NDA and now has to worry that if he ever tells anyone or is secretly recorded bragging about it, he could be sued himself.
to;dr this wasn’t the epic outcome they were hoping for, so they are indeed “chimping”
Originally posted by Robtard
Reality: They invested themselves into this deeply, they were expecting this to go to court and that a jury would have publicly awarded Sandmann hundreds and hundreds of millions over a lawsuit that amounts to his feelings being hurt, making it a landmark case against their dreaded “the leftist media!”Instead it happened behind closed doors, people don’t know how much he got and Sandmann signed an NDA and now has to worry that if he ever tells anyone or is secretly recorded bragging about it, he could be sued himself.
to;dr this wasn’t the epic outcome they were hoping for, so they are indeed “chimping”
If you were right, there would be no case and they would not be secretly settling.
As I correctly called out months ago, it was not protected speech what they did and they should lose these cases.
Just call me Lawyermon, now. 😄
That isn't correct. Corporations settle outside of court even when they know they can win, if the agreed upon amount of the settlement is less than what the legal bean counters estimate it would cost to go to court and win. It's a numbers game. eg If Sandmann agreed to say $50k and it would cost AT&T $200,000 to fight in court and win, they settle and do NDAs as it's cheaper and easier and no one will care come the following week.
Not saying this explicitly happened here, maybe they settled because the win-to-loss ratio was not as favorable as they'd want, but we don't know since they signed NDAs.
Originally posted by Robtard
That isn't correct. Corporations settle outside of court even when they know they can win, if the agreed upon amount of the settlement is less than what the legal bean counters estimate it would cost to go to court and win. It's a numbers game. eg If Sandmann agreed to say $50k and it would cost AT&T $200,000 to fight in court and win, they settle and do NDAs.Not saying this explicitly happened here, maybe they settled because the win-to-loss ratio was not as favorable as they'd want, but we don't know since they signed NDAs.
In this instance, I'd wager its as much about saving face as it is saving dollars, although we both understand that saving face does save dollars to keep up circulation and clicks.
They want this story dead and the family wants the green backs.
Originally posted by snowdragon
In this instance, I'd wager its as much about saving face as it is saving dollars, although we both understand that saving face does save dollars to keep up circulation and clicks.They want this story dead and the family wants the green backs.
We do live in a litigious society.
Originally posted by dadudemon
If you were right, there would be no case and they would not be secretly settling.As I correctly called out months ago, it was not protected speech what they did and they should lose these cases.
Just call me Lawyermon, now. 😄
Yeah the fact they won't let him reveal the amount of money he got is what is causing me to think this wasn't about mere legal fees.
I think we can all agree that the amount of money contained in the settlement would be dependent upon the *reason* CNN was settling. I agree with what Rob is saying when he says that the amount of money given would not be very much if CNN was settling because they just wanted to avoid legal fees.
However, I think the amount given in the settlement would be much higher if their motivation for settling was because they knew the discovery process would be devastating for them.
So I think if the number was revealed and it wasn't a mere 50k or something people would rightfully begin to wonder what CNN so desperately wanted to hide.
Originally posted by Robtardits not uber exactly Rob, its taxify our version of uber. Possibly, the law here is similar to the UK. You'd get told the driver acted as an individual in the uk... probably. It would be at most a tort of negligence against the driver unless he was acting like a nutter.
Not sure how African law works, but depending on his injuries, Uber will probably settle out of court and have him sign an NDA, what would likely happen in the US.