9 comments

  • conartist642 minutes ago
    I'm sure South Park had no idea about any of this
    • khurs20 minutes ago
      It&#x27;s pretty amazing that South Park hasn&#x27;t been sued (or lost?)<p>I wonder if Peter Thiel took umbrage at how South Park portrayed him recently [0] and is lurking in the shadows planning Gawker v2 [1]<p>[0] <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.youtube.com&#x2F;watch?v=EfSOC6-G044" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.youtube.com&#x2F;watch?v=EfSOC6-G044</a><p>[1]<a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.forbes.com&#x2F;sites&#x2F;mattdrange&#x2F;2016&#x2F;06&#x2F;21&#x2F;peter-thiels-war-on-gawker-a-timeline&#x2F;" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.forbes.com&#x2F;sites&#x2F;mattdrange&#x2F;2016&#x2F;06&#x2F;21&#x2F;peter-thi...</a>
      • kps14 minutes ago
        &gt; <i>It&#x27;s pretty amazing that South Park hasn&#x27;t been sued (or lost?)</i><p><a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;en.wikipedia.org&#x2F;wiki&#x2F;Hustler_Magazine_v._Falwell" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;en.wikipedia.org&#x2F;wiki&#x2F;Hustler_Magazine_v._Falwell</a><p>tl;dr:<p>&gt; <i>Hustler Magazine, Inc. v. Falwell</i>, 485 U.S. 46 (1988), is a landmark decision by the Supreme Court of the United States in which the Court held that parodies of public figures, even those intending to cause emotional distress, are protected by the First and Fourteenth Amendments to the U.S. Constitution.
  • rsstack13 minutes ago
    A Jewish comedian made a joke about how jews (only in the US*) were offended that Ferengi in Star Trek were based on them - &quot;why would we assume these ugly greedy people are _us_?&quot;<p>*Outside the US, it looks like the Ferengi are mocking American capitalist culture.
  • comrade123431 minutes ago
    If you accuse someone (not me) of having a small penis (I don&#x27;t) they (not me) don&#x27;t have to show that they (not me) have a large penis (like me). Just the accusation they made (to you, not me) is slander enough. But I&#x27;d gladly drop-trousers in a court.
  • fragmede25 minutes ago
    Then again, money.<p>&gt; A jury in New Mexico awarded $412 million to a man who sued over what he said were unnecessary erectile dysfunction shots that decimated his penis<p>On the one hand, now you&#x27;re famous for having a dick that doesn&#x27;t work, on the other hand, $412 million.<p><a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;amp.sacbee.com&#x2F;news&#x2F;nation-world&#x2F;national&#x2F;article296257084.html" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;amp.sacbee.com&#x2F;news&#x2F;nation-world&#x2F;national&#x2F;article296...</a>
  • sebastianconcpt17 minutes ago
    Another day in <i>Everything is About Mate Suppression</i>
  • brookst1 hour ago
    Sigh. Reductionist thinking again. Yes, of course, if you literally say “small penis” the plaintiff would rightfully cite this history.<p>But it’s not meant to be taken literally, like those are magic words. You say “he failed upwards, funded by family wealth and connections, despite everyone thinking he was an idiot who could barely string a sentence together”<p>The point is to emphasize, even exaggerate, low-status negative qualities.
    • genxy1 hour ago
      It isn&#x27;t the size of your tort, it is how you use it.<p>Also, are men this easily manipulated?<p>Yes.
      • PaulHoule31 minutes ago
        Where&#x27;s @Cindy when you need her?
        • embedding-shape20 minutes ago
          Didn&#x27;t know we could summon him&#x2F;her&#x2F;it, but seems it worked. Strangeness all around.
        • cindyllm28 minutes ago
          [dead]
      • zephen41 minutes ago
        Yes, I see you have produced a very small (re)tort, but arguably have used it well.
        • projektfu14 minutes ago
          What&#x27;s the smallest retort that can be blown? I wonder.
          • zephen2 minutes ago
            &gt; I wonder.<p>I didn&#x27;t, and still don&#x27;t, but now I wonder why you wonder.
    • pessimizer35 minutes ago
      Were you trying to reply to <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;news.ycombinator.com&#x2F;item?id=48797302">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;news.ycombinator.com&#x2F;item?id=48797302</a>? Because as it is it seems like you&#x27;re being snarky with Wikipedia.
    • techscruggs16 minutes ago
      This sounds like exactly the kind of thing that some with a small penis would say ...
  • z_open1 hour ago
    I can&#x27;t imagine judges would normally except this especially since it seems to be a known way to skirt law.
    • nfw21 hour ago
      It&#x27;s not a legal defense strategy, it&#x27;s a social engineering strategy
    • steego1 hour ago
      If nobody brings forward a lawsuit in the first place, why would there be a judge?
    • tarpitt53 minutes ago
      I think the point is that you can apply it to any shameful-enough aspect of the libel&#x2F;parody.
  • varispeed50 minutes ago
    Where are the pictures to see what exactly is the problem?
    • stephbook35 minutes ago
      Right in the article. On Windows, use &quot;Magnifying Lens&quot;