Re: The Onion just bought Alex Jones' Infowars

On Sun, 01 Dec 24 20:56:08 UTC, "W. Greenhouse"
<wgreenhouse@tilde.club> wrote:

The X filing is here:
https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.txsb.459750/gov.uscourts.txsb.459750.937.0.pdf
>
I don't think it's the first time, because X's attorneys cite some prior
examples of TOSes being interpreted this way.

If I was a lawyer, I would scratch on this...bankruptcy law....X wants
to have absolute control....but unknown about bankruptcy cases.

2. The License to Use The X Accounts Are Intellectual Property
Licenses

36. In addition to being a personal license, the license X Corp.
grants to account holders is an intellectual property license, and
pursuant to applicable non-bankruptcy law, in order to assign or
transfer such license, the licensor's (X Corp.) consent is required. X
Corp. has no consented to the assignment, sale, or transfer of the X
Accounts and the Current TOS explicitly states that X Corp.'s consent
is required for any assignment, sale or transfer of an account.

I did notice this CYA (Cover Your Ass clause):  "While the TOS make
clear that the Content belongs to the account holder"
=======================

He lost in a previous court case

US Supreme Court sidesteps case tied to probe of Trump social media
account
By John Kruzel
October 7, 2024

WASHINGTON, Oct 7 (Reuters) - The U.S. Supreme Court declined on
Monday to hear a challenge by Elon Musk's social media platform X on
free speech grounds of a judge's order that barred the company from
telling Donald Trump about a prosecutor's seizure of direct messages
and other data associated with the former president's Twitter account.

The justices turned away the company's appeal of U.S. District Judge
Beryl Howell's order that prohibited it from informing Trump about the
warrant from Special Counsel Jack Smith and required the handover of
information without the judge first hearing X's objections. X had
called the order a violation of the U.S. Constitution's First
Amendment, which limits the government's ability to restrict speech.

https://www.reuters.com/world/us/us-supreme-court-sidesteps-case-tied-probe-trump-social-media-account-2024-10-07/