....Judge Moon said Autry made good-faith efforts to mediate the dispute by removing uncontested videos of Caner and agreeing not to post videos of him in the future, and to sign a non-disparagement agreement. Autry balked, however, when Caner asked him to force his wife and three children — ages 4, 5 and 7 — to sign similar agreements, and he refused to turn over private correspondence without a subpoena....
....If Caner’s motives might not be clear solely from his settlement conduct, the judge said, his behavior during legal proceedings cleared up any doubt. “This case contains too many instances of Plaintiff’s dilatory conduct and objectively unreasonable litigation positions to credit his recent assertions of good faith,” the judge said. At one point, the judge said Caner portrayed Autry as a disgruntled former employee seeking revenge after losing his job, bent on harming his former boss financially by engaging in “cyber-terrorism.” Later, in his motion asking for fees, Caner claimed he “had no prior knowledge or relationship with Mr. Autry and has no desire to, in bad faith, vex and harass him.”
Not a surprise. Judges hate these kinds of suits that seem unnecessary.
Does this mean we can now post articles on FreeRepublic from news media who “seek to suppress criticism,” under the pretense of copyright protection.
Pride goeth before destruction, and an haughty spirit before a fall.