X claims ownership of Infowars accounts
Source: The Hill
11/27/24 11:37 AM ET
X, the social platform owned by Elon Musk, is getting involved in the pending bankruptcy sale of conspiracy theorist Alex Joness Infowars to the satirical newspaper The Onion. In an objection filed Monday, X said its terms of service (TOS) prevent Joness X accounts from being sold off without the companys approval. The platform does not oppose the other aspects of the sale.
Musk has developed an increasingly close relationship with President-elect Trump, having donated millions to Musks own pro-Trump super PAC and appeared on the campaign trail. After the election, Trump named Musk to co-head a new Department of Government Efficiency, and he has been a frequent presence at Mar-a-Lago.
The Trustee now seeks to contravene X Corp.s TOS by improperly selling or otherwise transferring the X Accounts (which neither Jones nor his bankruptcy estate own) to a third party, X wrote in Mondays objection. While X Corp. takes no position as to the sale of any Content posted on the X Accounts, X Corp. is the sole owner of the Services being sold as part of the sale of the X Accounts.
Jones and his company filed for bankruptcy protection after the families of the Sandy Hook Elementary School shooting victims sued Jones for defamation over his false claims the shooting was a hoax, winning $1.5 billion from him. Joness assets are now being liquidated, including Infowars, his right-wing conspiracy website.
Read more: https://thehill.com/regulation/court-battles/5012284-elon-musk-x-alex-jones-infowars-sale-the-onion/
ruet
(10,075 posts)doesn't that mean they loose the benefit of Section 230 protections?
Bernardo de La Paz
(51,252 posts)CousinIT
(10,484 posts)and all their other non-X accounts.
Eloon is a fucking greedy prick.
Bernardo de La Paz
(51,252 posts)ancianita
(38,871 posts)at the point when the Onion outbid everyone? So how can X/Elon even presume standing in this court?
And how can Infowars' TOS overrule the previous ruling that all Jones' assets must be sold off to pay the Sandy Hook plaintiffs' win?
None of what X/Musk is doing makes sense. Infowars' TOS can't exempt Infowars from lawsuits, or ANY site's TOS can do the same, such that no one can win a suit against a site for "loss, harm, or damage."
Am I missing something about how this court can rule in favor of some 3rd party that wants to assert itself as some new auction participant?
rampartd
(865 posts)isn't x responsible for the offemsive content?
sue "x"
The Grand Illuminist
(1,700 posts)nt
in2herbs
(3,227 posts)control and not the investors, we'll have to wait and see if the decision on this matter tracks with what is already a grab by Oligarchs.
Orrex
(64,323 posts)There would be no down side. None.
bucolic_frolic
(47,573 posts)Were they leased?
Figarosmom
(3,293 posts)Taking ownership of defamation isn't too bright. The way it is he took ownership of all posts on X which now opens him up to defamation suits. I think he thinks he's above the law like trump. But I don't think trump got out of paying E Jean Carroll and look at Guilliani 'woe is me can't pay my bills". Hope people with deep pockets start suing him.
Montauk6
(8,766 posts)Volaris
(10,645 posts)Which Alex and his idiots-for-lawyers couldn't be bothered to read, so now they're crying foul after the fact.
Montauk6
(8,766 posts)When capitalism happens to so-called capitalists, they instantly roll up like pillbugs and become the whiniest welfare queens.