Best news I have heard this week.
View: https://twitter.com/PPE_cel/status/1482310536117297154
This Wednesday, U.S. District Judge Yvonne Gonzalez Rogers granted Netflix's motion to dismiss a class action lawsuit filed by John Herndon, the father of a dead teenage foid. Alleging failure to adequately warn, wrongful death, and negligence, the Herndon family alleged that Netflix was responsible for his daughter's death, because she had killed herself after watching Thirteen Reasons Why. You can read the full ruling here.
For those who are out of the loop, Thirteen Reasons Why was a TV series popular a few years ago whose fictional storyline focused on the rape and suicide of a high school foid.
The Herndon family's attorneys tried to avoid First Amendment scrutiny by claiming that their lawsuit was focused not on the content of the show itself, but on Netflix's recommendation algorithms. But the judge didn't buy that argument, noting that the content of the show was inextricably tied to the nature of the suit:
Here are the most important takeaways:
View: https://twitter.com/PPE_cel/status/1482310536117297154
This Wednesday, U.S. District Judge Yvonne Gonzalez Rogers granted Netflix's motion to dismiss a class action lawsuit filed by John Herndon, the father of a dead teenage foid. Alleging failure to adequately warn, wrongful death, and negligence, the Herndon family alleged that Netflix was responsible for his daughter's death, because she had killed herself after watching Thirteen Reasons Why. You can read the full ruling here.
For those who are out of the loop, Thirteen Reasons Why was a TV series popular a few years ago whose fictional storyline focused on the rape and suicide of a high school foid.
The Herndon family's attorneys tried to avoid First Amendment scrutiny by claiming that their lawsuit was focused not on the content of the show itself, but on Netflix's recommendation algorithms. But the judge didn't buy that argument, noting that the content of the show was inextricably tied to the nature of the suit:
Here are the most important takeaways:
- Discussion of suicide and youth sexual abuse, regardless as to whether the manner of discussion is responsible or irresponsible, is protected by the First Amendment. (As incels noted in our letter to the U.S. Attorney General)
- Accordingly, the federal judiciary is extremely reluctant (an understatement) to expose such speech to civil or criminal liability, because doing so could create a chilling effect on future speech.
- The Herndon family thought that the epistemic privilege of a dead teenage foid could somehow persuade the federal judiciary to disregard the First Amendment. It didn't work.
- It was selfish of them to think that Netflix should otherwise censor or tailor their content (i.e. their First Amendment-protected expressive conduct) just to cater to parents who are terrible at parenting.
- Since the suit was dismissed under the anti-SLAPP provisions of California state law, the dead foid's family will be responsible for Netflix's legal fees.
Last edited:
