Alex Jones..

[Colonel_Klinck]

Elon's lawyers make argument that InfoWars Twitter accounts should remain under his control, surprise surprise, he thinks he owns us on his platform.

Pekka Kallioniemi (@vatniksoup.bsky.social)

Musk's lawyers are objecting the transfer of InfoWars' X accounts to The Onion. Their claim is that X has “superior ownership” of all accounts on the platform. That's right, Elon owns your account, its followers, subscribers, even your DMs. This is a very dangerous precedent.

bsky.app

 

[GIBURROWS]

Elon's lawyers make argument that InfoWars Twitter accounts should remain under his control, surprise surprise, he thinks he owns us on his platform.

Pekka Kallioniemi (@vatniksoup.bsky.social)

Musk's lawyers are objecting the transfer of InfoWars' X accounts to The Onion. Their claim is that X has “superior ownership” of all accounts on the platform. That's right, Elon owns your account, its followers, subscribers, even your DMs. This is a very dangerous precedent.

bsky.app

You should apply to be on the view, he doesn't think he owns us at all, stop talking rubbish.

 

[StriderX]

You should apply to be on the view, he doesn't think he owns us at all, stop talking rubbish.

The stipulation was 'on his platform'.

 

[sityeuropa]

Elon's lawyers make argument that InfoWars Twitter accounts should remain under his control, surprise surprise, he thinks he owns us on his platform.

Pekka Kallioniemi (@vatniksoup.bsky.social)

Musk's lawyers are objecting the transfer of InfoWars' X accounts to The Onion. Their claim is that X has “superior ownership” of all accounts on the platform. That's right, Elon owns your account, its followers, subscribers, even your DMs. This is a very dangerous precedent.

bsky.app

You know Musk is making the point you can't own a persons name / profile. You know that and are reaching unnecessarily. Another bad take, it really is amazing.

 

[Freakbro]

You know Musk is making the point you can't own a persons name / profile. You know that and are reaching unnecessarily. Another bad take, it really is amazing.

Business social media accounts get transferred to the new owners when that business is sold, taken over etc, it's not an uncommon practice.

I wonder what it is about the utter scum AJs business that Musk feels the need to try and stop this account being transferred to the new owners.

 

[StriderX]

You know Musk is making the point you can't own a persons name / profile. You know that and are reaching unnecessarily. Another bad take, it really is amazing.

I think it's a little different when it concerns a company name which is literally owned by the company.

 

[Freakbro]

We just sold a company and transferred over all it's social media accounts, including Twitter, to the new owner.

I'll await Musk's lawyers call...

 

[Kenai]

You know Musk is making the point you can't own a persons name / profile.

...by arguing that Twitter owns it?

So you can own it or you can't own it?

herp derp

 

[Werewolf]

I think it's a little different when it concerns a company name which is literally owned by the company.

yup especially if it's been trademarked etc.

When a company goes insolvant/bankrupt and has it's assets sold off pretty much anything associated with it goes, especially if it's been used as part of the company branding.

Alex Jones' twitter account is certainly linked to and an intrinsic part of the infowars/alex jones brand and and asset of that.

 

[Colonel_Klinck]

You should apply to be on the view, he doesn't think he owns us at all, stop talking rubbish.

Where did I say he owns us? I said he owns our accounts on his platform.

 

[JRS]

Question - why does anyone think that if you were to buy InfoWars you wouldn't get the InfoWars Twitter account with it? It's an asset of the company, no?

 

[Colonel_Klinck]

Question - why does anyone think that if you were to buy InfoWars you wouldn't get the InfoWars Twitter account with it? It's an asset of the company, no?

Exactly. Imagine buying a company where its output is mainly on social media and then having say YouTube tell you, sorry we own that channel that has hundreds of videos and millions of views.

 

[Nigel Kingdon]

TL; DR; the thread, but it seams to me mainstream media won this battle a long time ago. It's not 'Social Media' it's an advertising platform.

 

[platinum87]

Exactly. Imagine buying a company where its output is mainly on social media and then having say YouTube tell you, sorry we own that channel that has hundreds of videos and millions of views.

Question - why does anyone think that if you were to buy InfoWars you wouldn't get the InfoWars Twitter account with it? It's an asset of the company, no?

What are you confused about, you do not own any account on any platform.

These terms exist before elon musk and apply on all accounts everywhere, you do not own any online accounts you have.

 

[JRS]

What are you confused about, you do not own any account on any platform.

These terms exist before elon musk and apply on all accounts everywhere, you do not own any online accounts you have.

Well, hang on. We've got some folks arguing on here that we're wrong when we say that what you've just said is Elon's position and now we've got you agreeing with Elon that those accounts aren't owned by individuals/companies and are property of the social media sites/companies.

This seems...unsatisfactory. So say the InfoWars sale to The Onion is signed, sealed and delivered but Musk's X decides 'oop, the InfoWars account gets to stay in the control of someone else'. X's own rules prevent people from masquerading as a company or posting as if they're the official voice of same.

 

[platinum87]

Well, hang on. We've got some folks arguing on here that we're wrong when we say that what you've just said is Elon's position and now we've got you agreeing with Elon that those accounts aren't owned by individuals/companies and are property of the social media sites/companies.

This seems...unsatisfactory. So say the InfoWars sale to The Onion is signed, sealed and delivered but Musk's X decides 'oop, the InfoWars account gets to stay in the control of someone else'. X's own rules prevent people from masquerading as a company or posting as if they're the official voice of same.

The way you are writing i don't get what is your point.

All accounts are owned by the providers of those accounts.

In this specific instance, info wars does not own its X account, and never did.

Elon musk can do whatever he wants.

 

[Devilman]

<snip>

Elon musk can do whatever he wants.

No, no he cannot.

As much as you may want for your lord and saviour Elon to be able to do whatever he pleases, wherever he pleases, the world and the law does not work that way.

You are wrong.

 

[C Kent]

aaaaannnd the sale has been blocked to the onion

Judge rejects sale of Alex Jones' Infowars to The Onion in dispute over bankruptcy auction

A federal judge has rejected the sale after Jones claimed that a recent bankruptcy auction was fraught with illegal collusion.

apnews.com

 

[JRS]

aaaaannnd the sale has been blocked to the onion

Judge rejects sale of Alex Jones' Infowars to The Onion in dispute over bankruptcy auction

A federal judge has rejected the sale after Jones claimed that a recent bankruptcy auction was fraught with illegal collusion.

apnews.com

Lopez cited problems — but no wrongdoing — with the auction process. He said he did not want another auction and left it up to the trustee who oversaw the auction to determine the next steps.

So much for those who were saying it was corrupt

 

[Sankari]

The Onion's bid included a clause in which many of the Sandy Hook families waived their right to $750,000 of the auction proceeds, ensuring other creditors could be paid. The judge wanted more money going to the families. The decision has been punted back to the trustees.