Posted on 04/28/2023 10:57:51 AM PDT by Red Badger
Yup, non-compete contracts are especially hard to hold up.
Interesting take, though they will likely say just cancel your cable.
Trapped...
SNORT.
Yes and no. If the blow back wasn’t so bad and if Tucker didn’t hit 70 million views on his Twitter speech on Tues it would be easier for Fix. Times and communications means have changed. Fox is a day late and a dollar short.
Give me $20 Million and you can ‘trap’ me........................
This is exactly my thinking. He didn't sign up for the possibility of not doing a show. By stopping his show, *THEY* violated the contract.
At least that's what I would expect to see argued.
Yes they are very difficult..
It’s becoming pretty clear why Rush set up the EIB Network.
Somebody that may own a lot of shares in FOX should sue them to high heaven for violating their fiduciary responsibility to the shareholders for political destruction of their enemies, and FOX’s losses for doing this to Tucker should also be considered a donation to the DNC.
don’t need a lot of shares, one is enough with financial backing..I agree with your post 100% fight like you are the third money on the ranp to the ark and its starting to rain....
The big indicator here was the report that Carlson had retained a top media attorney to represent him. That suggested to me that he was looking to get out of a contract that would have bound him to Fox News even after they "fired" him.
On the one hand, he'd have a hard time making the case that he needs the money if Fox News is willing to pay him $20M/year to do nothing.
On the other hand, he could easily claim that he's worth far more than that on the open market -- and that Fox would be diminishing his value and future earning potential by keeping him off the air.
But I guess we'll find out shortly.
So, they have to pay him and he has to perform as they order him to? That'll get old real fast, paying a guy big bucks to stay off the air.
Maybe after being used by key people at Faux to torpedo Trump, she finally gets it.
I was thinking the same thing. As long as he isn't the host, or being paid he should be free to be a regular guest "interviewee" one would think he wouldn't be violating a non-compete. He could also post video commentary on Twitter where he could be amplified.
I do like some of the remaining Fox talent but I will no longer watch them. The management of Fox News is evil.
You cannot take someone’s career from them.
ping
It’s a violation of his freedom of speech. A contract is not that kind of muzzle.
I agree! Lawsuit time!
Hummm, but it would not prevent him from being Trumps VP pick and engaging in robust media conversations about the election. Fox News would be paying him the entire time.
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.