Skip navigation

alevyThe talk about a lawsuit as a result of an article by Ariel Levy has to be satire as anyone discussing this subject has to know that the lawsuit is not going to happen and it would not be winnable if it did. What is funny about these discussions is whom it is that is suggested to bring the lawsuit. The plaintiff in this lawsuit would be none other than the defendant in the famous Saltsman v Goddard lawsuit that was filed in the State of Ohio.


The core of the defense in that lawsuit was freedom of speech and it is also the reason that The Ohio chapter of the ACLU got involved. What is interesting about any lawsuit filed by the plaintiff is that her own defense arguments cited in the Ohio lawsuit would be used against her.


There is also the matter of discovery. It might serve those arguing for these lawsuits to watch the movie entitled “The Social Network” which detailed the two lawsuits that broke out over the creation of Facebook. While the lawsuits were mainly for breech of contract and theft of intellectual property issues, it was the process of discovery and depositions that were the most important.


The Plaintiff would have to give a SWORN deposition (under oath) as part of the discovery process in the lawsuit that would be done by the defendant’s legal council. It is likely that prior bad acts would also be admissible in the lawsuit which, in this case, would be the various blogs and social media sites operated by and commented on by the plaintiff.

Another problem for the plaintiff is that since it is she who would have filed the lawsuit, there would be no hiding in the desert to avoid process servers. The act of filing would require the disclosure of residence and a personal appearance at any number of depositions and court sessions that the lawsuit would produce.

In short, the lawsuit would open a can of worms that the Plaintiff would just as soon remain closed.

There will be no lawsuit.

Any talk of a lawsuit satire at best and a joke at most.

Stay Tuned