He would be, and he wouldn’t be the first one to get in trouble for a sex tape. When you live a life in public you are responsible for your own press.
Sorry it does hold, your very example HAS happened. Pam Anderson lost gigs because of her sex tape that was stolen from her safe. Bad press is bad press.
The fact that you can say it was used to shame the NBA is exactly why my argument is right. HIS actions were used against the NBA, the commissioner’s primary job is to protect the NBA, he must be punished to protect the league.
No he won’t win. The best he can hope for is the fact that he’s 81 means he can probably drag it out in court long enough to die. He owns a FRANCHISE, franchise owning comes with rules, and part of those rules ALWAYS includes revocation of your franchise rights.
As opposed to owning a KFC or Dunkin' Donuts franchise, I think the NBA as a business entity, anti-trust laws etc. certainly can come into the equation of how the Courts rule. I'd say there is a good chance that even if the owners vote him down which they probably will do, he'll have a fighting chance.
I’m not arguing about the existence of the contact provisions. I’m arguing that they can’t be invoked as a result of the criminal disclosure of an entirely private act.
While supposedly private, Pam Anderson voluntarily participated in a sex tape. This was a private phone call made with every expectation of privacy. There is a huge procedural difference. And the NBA also aggravated the harm shading itself by not acknowledging these issues at least add much as it acknowledged the content of the tape. These differences count, and will not be overlooked by his lawyers.
Anyway, my opinion. We’ll find out though, because this obviously isn’t over.