It’s hard to tell — it’s unclear exactly what transpired after he began his lecture, and what, if anything, happened following that.
Either way, we’re grateful for those who did record the event, so we can review that footage for future students.
(Hat tip: Newsday)
Citing ‘ongoing harassment, intimidation, discrimination, bullying, or retaliation,’ the National Coalition Against Censorship filed a lawsuit in Manhattan Supreme Court on Tuesday against Twitter seeking an injunction barring the service from continuing to do “anything to stop or censor” its users.
The suit names Twitter as a defendant, as well as the company’s co-founder and former CEO Dick Costolo, and the four other co-founders, along with the former CEO, Evan Williams, and its executive vice president of global advertising and business development, Michael O’Dell.
According to the complaint, Twitter has been responsible for “incitement of and encouraging” violent hate speech since the company first introduced its “block” feature in 2007 “as a tool to block online speech that it disagreed with.”
In the lawsuit, the National Coalition describes a pattern of harassment that has continued over the course of several years, from “disorders,” including stalking, to threats to kidnap female journalists who criticized Twitter’s policies. Additionally, the lawsuit accuses Twitter of engaging in anti-LGBT harassment, which “is the use of the Twitter platform and Twitter’s employees as a means to incite or promote the sexual harassment of LGBT people and others.”
The plaintiffs are seeking monetary damages in excess of $10 million. Twitter has not yet responded.
Though the law protects free speech, the law also creates liability for Twitter, which it has claimed is not legally bound to do much of anything. The statute allows for lawsuits over “publicly-disseminated libel,” which it described as “any false statement of fact in a published news story or commentary that a reasonable person taking the facts in view would, if made in public, have understood to be false.” The statute also provides a remedy if a “public figure” is injured if his “rights have been violated for a period of five years from the date of the injury.”
But critics note that the definition of “public figure” is vague, and the court has not ruled in favor of plaintiffs over statements that merely appeared to be offensive. Last month, the court noted that a company such as Twitter can and does use Twitter to ”
learn books of the old testament, how do you learn ventriloquism fasting glucose, learn ventriloquism dvdfab decrypter old, learn ventriloquism tom crowley, best program to learn fast typing games