Hunter Biden’s Lawyers Put Fox News on Notice, Demand Retractions and an Apology – Or Risk a Defamation Lawsuit

[RocksInMyHead]

And even looking at the information is legally questionable; technically the are only allowed to look at things as required for repairs or, if you don't pick up your machine, (if they believe they have incorrect contact info) to look for correct contact information.

In the context of a repair person yes - I was speaking about data on items whose ownership has been transferred.

 

[RocksInMyHead]

Nope. Not even that is legal. You can look at the on the original device, but you can't duplicate or distribute them in any fashion.

Distributing would, I think, fall outside of personal use. And while it might technically be illegal to make copies, I'm not sure how that could possibly be proven if you never gave them to anyone.

 

[SimplyMe]

In the context of a repair person yes - I was speaking about data on items whose ownership has been transferred.

That is it, though, as others have pointed out, the hardware ownership transfers (and any software originally on the computer) but the data does not and legally still is not to be accessed (though maybe not well obeyed, particularly with the difficulty of attempting to enforce it).

 

[essentialsaltes]

Fox News Pulls Hunter Biden ‘Mock Trial’ Miniseries Amid Lawsuit Threat​

Fox News swiftly took down a six-part miniseries focused on Hunter Biden from its streaming platform following a threat of legal action from Hunter Biden’s attorneys. The controversial program, titled “The Trial of Hunter Biden,” stirred controversy with its incendiary content, including sexually explicit images and a “mock trial” narrative surrounding Biden’s legal issues.

 

[RocksInMyHead]

That is it, though, as others have pointed out, the hardware ownership transfers (and any software originally on the computer) but the data does not and legally still is not to be accessed (though maybe not well obeyed, particularly with the difficulty of attempting to enforce it).

I guess I don't really see the point of an unenforceable law.

 

[essentialsaltes]

Fox News Pulls Hunter Biden ‘Mock Trial’ Miniseries Amid Lawsuit Threat​

Fox News swiftly took down a six-part miniseries focused on Hunter Biden from its streaming platform following a threat of legal action from Hunter Biden’s attorneys.

Not good enough.

Hunter Biden sues Fox News over mock trial program​

The son of President Biden filed the suit Monday in the New York State Supreme Court. Biden’s lawsuit asserts that Fox News defamed him in a six-part series shown on its streaming platform Fox Nation called “The Trial of Hunter Biden: A Mock Trial for the American People.”

The 2022 series featured Judge Joe Brown, a syndicated TV jurist, presiding over a dramatized court proceeding showing Biden on trial for bribery and illegal financial dealings with foreign governments. Biden has never been indicted on such charges.

The series opened with a disclaimer noting that viewers were not seeing a real trial and that Biden had not been charged with any of the crimes portrayed in the program. But the series did use actual emails and images from Biden’s laptop to make the case against him.

“While using certain true information, the series intentionally manipulates the facts, distorts the truth, narrates happenings out of context, and invents dialogue intended to entertain,” the suit said. “Thus, the viewer of the series cannot decipher what is fact and what is fiction, which is highly damaging to Mr. Biden.”

 

[Astrid]

"Lawyers for Hunter Biden are demanding Fox News issue corrections about some of its coverage of the president’s son or risk a defamation lawsuit, according to the Washington Post."

MSN

I found myself laughing at this one because of its potential to backfire. which would be well deserved in my opinion. I guess it does have one big plus on their end, namely that the biggest reason for a lawsuit is the ability to prove damages and if Hunter (I assume) is losing business and suffering from other financial hardship and the people that are canceling the contracts, backing out of business deals etc. are naming what is going on in the news (where Fox is at the center of things) then that most important criteria is likely met.

The problem is there are other considerations such as: if the information is actually true, and if the information is false does it appear to be spread purely for malicious reasons. From what I can tell, Fox is only (or mostly) guilty of reporting factual information on a story is truly newsworthy, when the rest of mainstream media that has a pro-Democratic bias would rather turn a blind eye.

I say go for it!! Bread and circus!!
Billable Hours!!

 

[Ana the Ist]

Not good enough.

Hunter Biden sues Fox News over mock trial program​

The son of President Biden filed the suit Monday in the New York State Supreme Court. Biden’s lawsuit asserts that Fox News defamed him in a six-part series shown on its streaming platform Fox Nation called “The Trial of Hunter Biden: A Mock Trial for the American People.”

The 2022 series featured Judge Joe Brown, a syndicated TV jurist, presiding over a dramatized court proceeding showing Biden on trial for bribery and illegal financial dealings with foreign governments. Biden has never been indicted on such charges.

The series opened with a disclaimer noting that viewers were not seeing a real trial and that Biden had not been charged with any of the crimes portrayed in the program. But the series did use actual emails and images from Biden’s laptop to make the case against him.

“While using certain true information, the series intentionally manipulateshttps://www.christianforums.com/forums/news-current-events-articles-required.71/ the facts, distorts the truth, narrates happenings out of context, and invents dialogue intended to entertain,” the suit said. “Thus, the viewer of the series cannot decipher what is fact and what is fiction, which is highly damaging to Mr. Biden.”

Highly damaging?

What is Hunter claiming was damaged? His work ethic/professionalism? Perhaps his legal acumen? His budding art career?

 

[Ana the Ist]

It is legal to use them in a personal capacity. It is not legal to sell them or otherwise profit from them - intellectual property laws still apply. If I was writing a novel and left a copy on a computer that I sold to you, I would have ample grounds to sue you if you tried to publish it under your name - you didn't write it, and I didn't sell you the novel. I sold you the computer (the hardware). I couldn't really do anything to get the copy of the novel back from you, but all you would be able to do with it legally is read it.

A moral person wouldn't, perhaps, but, considering that this entire situation hinges on someone who did not wipe the device in question and instead sold the contents, it seems a bit silly to claim that "no one" would do it.

There was evidence of crimes. It's my understanding that he tried to turn it over to the FBI.

The left used to like the Snowdens and Assanges of the world.

 

[Ana the Ist]

That is it, though, as others have pointed out, the hardware ownership transfers (and any software originally on the computer) but the data does not and legally still is not to be accessed (though maybe not well obeyed, particularly with the difficulty of attempting to enforce it).

You're talking about the small, privately owned PC repair shop?

 

[SimplyMe]

You're talking about the small, privately owned PC repair shop?

Yes, the PC repair shop. The shop can sell the hardware, they are not entitled to any software (beyond the operating system) or data on the computer.

 

[SimplyMe]

Highly damaging?

What is Hunter claiming was damaged? His work ethic/professionalism? Perhaps his legal acumen? His budding art career?

I'd say the pictures are one major reason. There are clear laws about posting explicit photographs without the permission of the subjects (typically known as "revenge porn" laws).

 

[Ana the Ist]

Yes, the PC repair shop. The shop can sell the hardware, they are not entitled to any software (beyond the operating system) or data on the computer.

Well, without any specifics, I'm assuming he has a waiver for both abandoned property....and property containing evidence of a crime.

For example, imagine that in a similar situation....the laptop contained "child pics". Not only would we want him to contact the police or relevant authorities....but a backup of the evidence is a good idea in case the criminal arrives to reclaim his property before the police arrive.

This is very much one of those situations and frankly, his life would be in danger without those copies. His best chance of staying alive is to have them in public media asap.

 

[SimplyMe]

Well, without any specifics, I'm assuming he has a waiver for both abandoned property....and property containing evidence of a crime.

For example, imagine that in a similar situation....the laptop contained "child pics". Not only would we want him to contact the police or relevant authorities....but a backup of the evidence is a good idea in case the criminal arrives to reclaim his property before the police arrive.

This is very much one of those situations and frankly, his life would be in danger without those copies. His best chance of staying alive is to have them in public media asap.

I'll agree with the waiver for law enforcement. It is rather gray, and likely illegal, for him to have given it to Giuliani (short of him hiring Giuliani as his attorney). Giuliani can likely be sued for releasing it to the news media, to include Fox -- though it is rather meaningless since Giuliani has a negative net worth (with the amount owed for his defamation lawsuits). And Fox definitely did not have permission to show items from the hard drive on TV, hence the defamation suit.

 

[Ana the Ist]

I'd say the pictures are one major reason. There are clear laws about posting explicit photographs without the permission of the subjects (typically known as "revenge porn" laws).

Unfortunately he's a public figure. I'm not sure if the rules for his state cover public figures from that sort of thing or not.

 

[Ana the Ist]

I'll agree with the waiver for law enforcement. It is rather gray, and likely illegal, for him to have given it to Giuliani (short of him hiring Giuliani as his attorney).

I don't think it's legal for him to have sold it....but given that the whole incident essentially ruined his business, I'm not exactly looking down on him for it.

You compare it to what happened to Ashley Biden and her diary and the guy who repairs laptops is basically a saint.

Giuliani can likely be sued for releasing it to the news media, to include Fox

It seems unlikely....he didn't steal it, it's not fabricated.


Again, he's a public figure.

-- though it is rather meaningless since Giuliani has a negative net worth (with the amount owed for his defamation lawsuits).

How much does he owe?

And Fox definitely did not have permission to show items from the hard drive on TV, hence the defamation suit.

Why would they need permission? They have freedom of the press....

 

[SimplyMe]

Unfortunately he's a public figure. I'm not sure if the rules for his state cover public figures from that sort of thing or not.

Those types of laws cover everyone, including public figures -- for example, the number have famous people sued for having their cloud accounts hacked and pictures stolen, including getting Google to remove them from search results due to lawsuits.

I also suspect there will be an interesting argument that Hunter Biden should not be classified as a "public figure." He is only a public figure, in the sense that he is the son of a President -- but that makes Barron Trump a public figure, as well as every other child of a president ever, and I'm not sure courts will want to make that ruling. Hunter is really only famous due to the laptop -- I doubt the average person could have named Hunter while Joe was Vice President.

 

[Ana the Ist]

Those types of laws cover everyone, including public figures -- for example, the number have famous people sued for having their cloud accounts hacked and pictures stolen, including getting Google to remove them from search results due to lawsuits.

Absolutely....but we aren't speaking about something stolen. Ashley Biden's diary was stolen and sold to media and the woman who did this was recently sentenced.

As I said before, this guy repairs computers. It seems really unlikely this is his first time he came across a crime. It seems very likely that he had a waiver he requires a signature on before he repairs any computers. He's being sued....not charged with a crime....right?

Assuming these things were acquired legally...Hunter doesn't have much of a case. He doesn't have the same expectations of privacy as a private individual.

I also suspect there will be an interesting argument that Hunter Biden should not be classified as a "public figure."

Oh?

He is only a public figure, in the sense that he is the son of a President -- but that makes Barron Trump a public figure, as well as every other child of a president ever, and I'm not sure courts will want to make that ruling.

Oh?

Hunter is really only famous due to the laptop -- I doubt the average person could have named Hunter while Joe was Vice President.

Amazon.com

Regarding his original paintings...I like this one....

.

I think it would be a difficult struggle to make it appear as if Hunter has tried to remain a private figure...especially with his attempts to cash in on his name.

 

[SimplyMe]

Absolutely....but we aren't speaking about something stolen. Ashley Biden's diary was stolen and sold to media and the woman who did this was recently sentenced.

As I said before, this guy repairs computers. It seems really unlikely this is his first time he came across a crime. It seems very likely that he had a waiver he requires a signature on before he repairs any computers. He's being sued....not charged with a crime....right?

Assuming these things were acquired legally...Hunter doesn't have much of a case. He doesn't have the same expectations of privacy as a private individual.

Except it sort of was stolen -- again, there is no right to the data. Yes, if the computer repair person believes there is evidence of a crime, they are free to turn it over to law enforcement. On the flip side, even if they do it it is rarely ever charged. As a prime example, of all the iCloud theft of various photos, how many of those people have ever been charged? It is an area that is extremely difficult to prosecute.

As for prosecution of the computer owner, prosecution would be even harder; again, he'll argue in court that he merely turned it over to "his" lawyer (to protect himself) and the FBI. Giuliani could be prosecuted but, again, it would be difficult to prosecute (our privacy laws are pathetic, in general) and Giuliani already has a lot of legal issues and is bankrupt (with legal debt that likely can't be "forgiven" by a bankruptcy), so he is unlikely to be sued.

Oh?



Oh?

Did you know about Hunter before the laptop, maybe other than generically having heard about his as the son of Joe Biden? What about William Bain, do you know who he is? Hunter did mostly similar types of work as William Bain -- and Bain was far better known that Hunter Biden (Bain had a company where he was the name partner). Yes, Hunter appeared to capitalize on his father's name but not in a public way, instead he let people know who were looking to invest with him who his father was, which doesn't lead to "fame."

Again, trying to state Hunter Biden was a public figure pre-laptop would be a horrible decision for any child of a famous person, as it essentially paints all of them as "public persons" and destroys their right to privacy.

Amazon.com

Regarding his original paintings...I like this one....

.View attachment 351172


I think it would be a difficult struggle to make it appear as if Hunter has tried to remain a private figure...especially with his attempts to cash in on his name.

Yes, since the laptop Hunter hasn't been able to be a private figure -- pretty tough when he is brought up constantly in political debates, with nude pictures of him displayed in Congress. Notice that he wasn't attempting to sell paintings prior to the laptop (and when his work as in private equity was no longer possible). In fact, I'd say that his inability to go back to being a private figure only strengthens his case.

 

[essentialsaltes]

Not good enough.

Hunter Biden sues Fox News over mock trial program​

The son of President Biden filed the suit Monday in the New York State Supreme Court. Biden’s lawsuit asserts that Fox News defamed him in a six-part series shown on its streaming platform Fox Nation called “The Trial of Hunter Biden: A Mock Trial for the American People.”

Maybe it was good enough after all.

Hunter Biden drops lawsuit over Fox News ‘mock trial’ miniseries​

The president’s son did not explain why he had withdrawn the litigation, which accused Fox of violating “revenge porn” laws by using his intimate photos without permission.

In his suit filed July 1, Biden accused Fox of unlawfully enriching itself by using his image, inflicting emotional distress and illegally publishing his intimate photos in violation of New York’s “revenge porn” law.