Posted on 07/01/2020 8:06:58 PM PDT by conservative98
All you need to know right there. Blame it on the nursing home butcher.
>> Justice Scheinkman wrote, “S&S has not agreed to surrender or relinquish any of its First Amendment rights.”
What a childish remark, Scheinky.
A contract between two does not restrict the entire world to the terms of the contract.
Only those who are a party to the contract.
But what this does, depending upon the terms in the contract, is expose the Trump niece to a lawsuit on the grounds that she violated the terms of the contract.
I believe I read that she received a large sum of money in return for signing the contract.
If so, she will more than likely be sued for return of the money and probably will lose in court.
Contracts are a serious matter and can be enforced.
“No contract matters!”
I would guess that she has been guaranteed substantially more from democrat sources than she ever received in the will.
The bar for prior restraint is super high, violation of contract doesn’t meet the bar, not even close. Trump may have a civil case after the book is published, but there’s no precedent for preventing publication. Bolton was arguable due to national security concerns, but that’s not the case here. Nation of laws.
Interesting.
But how can S^S buy what the author is unable to sell?
Trying to follow...
How can S#S sell what is forbidden, by contract, to sell?
It’s a first amendment issue, basically the same as in libel cases. There are certain rights you cannot sign away, those include the right to lie, the right to speak / publish, etc. Now you can absolutely be sued for every dime you have afterward, but you can’t be prevented in a court of law from publishing beforehand.
Thanks. I get it.
So, this person’ rejection of the contract can only be
pnished after it happens.
I’ll be avoiding such contracts!
I am not a lawyer, so I can’t answer that question.
However I would suspect that a lawyer would argue that this is not the same as buying a stolen car, which has a title,,,or stolen property.. The publisher has the right to buy stories of any kind, fact, fiction satire or whatever. The fault is with the seller who violates a contract, commits libel, plagiarism or whatever.
You will recal that the New York Times has printed information damaging to national security and avoided prosecution because their defense was that they did not steal it and it was going to be publish by someone somewhere as it was at that point public information.
Pretty close to the case here.
Now whether it is ethical or not is another discussion but as most of us old guys have learned, what is legal and what is ethical are frequently farther apart than a derby winner and a jackass.
” as most of us old guys have learned, what is legal and what is ethical are frequently farther apart than a derby winner and a jackass. “
So true.
The Law is the best we have, but it is no better than we.
.
And we ar VERY fallible.
Libel suit to be filed tomorrow!
wow tablet fart right there...
Typhoid Mary Trump has stashed financial documents of the Patriarch of the Trump clan supposedly. This will give more momentum to the need to open Trumps docs to NYT scrutiny.
How can we as a society have any law or order when
1) Obama pays union officials and members ahead of legally entitled bond holders for car companies, against all established law?
2) Bill Cosby pays off a wench for sexual deeds, she signs an agreement that in exchange for money, she will shut up, and become a rich woman. Another judge says, she can keep the money and still use Civil Court records to prosecute in Criminal Court?
3) A stripper who at one time alleged that her and DJT did the jiggy jiggy push push, but DJT pays her off with a similar agreement as Cosby. Yet she is on the news with a lawyer for 3 years talking about what she agreed not to talk about, yet she violated an agreement, but doesn’t have to pay back the money she extorted even though a Judge signed the thing?
4) Now a family member, to extort a portion of a large inheritance and settle a will, agrees in exchange for money to enter into an agreement NEVER to publish the “family business” unless all parties agree to that publishing. A Judge rules that she can publish, but also that a publishing company has no problem printing out the very thing that should make them all criminals?
There simply is not law in the US. It truly is JUST US.
Maverick, is that you?
Judge Alan D. Scheinkman reversed a lower court’s decision... ruled that Simon & Schuster wasn’t bound by a nondisclosure agreement the author signed as part of a dispute over the 1999 will of the president’s father, Fred Trump... But Scheinkman declined to rule at this time on whether Mary Trump herself had violated the deal herself.
I read she had a legal fight over some inheritance and she lost? Sounds like a revenge book to me much like Bolton. Freakin leftists must spend all day looking for people like this, then they offer them a ton of money. Remember Gloria Allreds daughter Lisa Bloom was caught offering to pay the mortgage of one woman if she would accuse Trump of sexual assault? And of course nothing happens to her, she’s still a lawyer.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.