US District Judge Charles Breyer dismissed a lawsuit that Elon Musk's X brought against a research organization last year, stating, "This case is about punishing the Defendants for their speech."
Filed in the Northern District of California, X's case claimed that the organization Center for Countering Digital Hate had breached the platform's terms of service by collecting information for studies that showed a notable spike in hate speech on X after Musk took control.
The business said that the CCDH was liable for "tens of millions of dollars" in damages as a result of internal investigative costs and lost advertising income.
However, Breyer said that "there can be no mistaking" that the true goal of the lawsuit was to intimidate X's detractors into quiet.
The ruling referenced a poll indicating that due to Musk's CEO directives, "social media researchers have canceled, suspended, or changed more than 100 studies about X." Previous statements made by Musk describe him as a "free speech absolutist" and claim that the purpose of his "thermonuclear" litigation against media watchdog organizations is "protecting free speech."
Breyer delivered a stinging rebuke, claiming that X's attempts to skirt the core problem with claims of data security and privacy were insufficient to counter the CCDH's First Amendment rights. Although X did not dispute any of the facts in the CCDH's investigations, it did want restitution for advertising income it claimed to have lost as a result of those reports in its lawsuit.
"It is apparent to the Court that X Corp. wishes to have it both ways," observed Justice Breyer, "to be spared the burdens of pleading a defamation claim, while bemoaning the harm to its reputation, and seeking punishing damages based on reputational harm."
In a footnote, he stated: "If there is any question about the 'punishing' part, X Corp. filed a similar suit, not before this Court, in November of 2023 against Media Matters, another non-profit media watchdog, for 'reporting on ads from major brands appearing next to neo-Nazi content.'"
Imran Ahmed, the CEO and founder of CCDH, said in a statement that Musk's lawsuit was a part of his "loud, hypocritical campaign of harassment, abuse, and lawfare designed to avoid taking responsibility for his own decisions."
"We hope this landmark ruling will embolden public-interest researchers everywhere," he said, "to continue, and even intensify, their vital work of holding social media companies accountable for the hate and disinformation they host and the harm they cause."
Filed in the Northern District of California, X's case claimed that the organization Center for Countering Digital Hate had breached the platform's terms of service by collecting information for studies that showed a notable spike in hate speech on X after Musk took control.
The business said that the CCDH was liable for "tens of millions of dollars" in damages as a result of internal investigative costs and lost advertising income.
However, Breyer said that "there can be no mistaking" that the true goal of the lawsuit was to intimidate X's detractors into quiet.
The ruling referenced a poll indicating that due to Musk's CEO directives, "social media researchers have canceled, suspended, or changed more than 100 studies about X." Previous statements made by Musk describe him as a "free speech absolutist" and claim that the purpose of his "thermonuclear" litigation against media watchdog organizations is "protecting free speech."
Breyer delivered a stinging rebuke, claiming that X's attempts to skirt the core problem with claims of data security and privacy were insufficient to counter the CCDH's First Amendment rights. Although X did not dispute any of the facts in the CCDH's investigations, it did want restitution for advertising income it claimed to have lost as a result of those reports in its lawsuit.
"It is apparent to the Court that X Corp. wishes to have it both ways," observed Justice Breyer, "to be spared the burdens of pleading a defamation claim, while bemoaning the harm to its reputation, and seeking punishing damages based on reputational harm."
In a footnote, he stated: "If there is any question about the 'punishing' part, X Corp. filed a similar suit, not before this Court, in November of 2023 against Media Matters, another non-profit media watchdog, for 'reporting on ads from major brands appearing next to neo-Nazi content.'"
Imran Ahmed, the CEO and founder of CCDH, said in a statement that Musk's lawsuit was a part of his "loud, hypocritical campaign of harassment, abuse, and lawfare designed to avoid taking responsibility for his own decisions."
"We hope this landmark ruling will embolden public-interest researchers everywhere," he said, "to continue, and even intensify, their vital work of holding social media companies accountable for the hate and disinformation they host and the harm they cause."
