I know it’s a glitch, but I love that this @AutismCapital has zero followers.
Elmer Musk is angry at the oh-so-woke Onion acquistion of disInfoWars – in part, I suspect, because it implies that he cannot simply buy whatsoever with his ridiculous wealth. He says that he owns all the related accounts on his Xwittex platform and will do with them as he pleases, which probably includes handing hem back over to Jones so he can continue to Xcrete rivers of dangerous bullshit.
I wonder if those Infowars accounts include DMs between Musk and Jones…
Ok, Elmo, you own the “account”, but you don’t own the collection of letters I-n-f-o-W-a-r-s, that is a trademark, owned by The Onion.
If you decide to go ahead and infringe on The Onion’s trademark with this account you claim to own, I would suggest you get ready for a trademark infringement lawsuit that you will definitely lose.
Well The Onion doesn’t quite own it yet. There will be a hearing this month, and my assumption is it will be presided over by a Trumpy judge who will nullify the auction. And if that happens, 50/50 shot Musk buys Infowars himself. Because this is the worst timeline.
The content on the account is owned by Infowars, not Twitter. If the sale goes through it means that The Onion now owns that content (even if Twitter owns the account itself).
Musk can probably find a bullshit reason to delete the account but he can’t take over the content and he certainly can’t hand control of that content to a third party.
Well, he could and then deal with the inevitable lawsuits and so on, knowing all the while that his vast wealth shields him from any serious consequences.
That does seem to be his preferred method of dealing with his foot’s constant presence in his mouth.
Or, rather, that knowledge lets him freely satisfy his urge to constantly stuff that thing in his mouth.
Oh sure, there’s always the possibility that he’ll give it a shot just to get likes and retweets from all his Nazi besties.
We in the USA are about to get a crash course in the rather unfamiliar topic known as “impunity”.
I predict a lot of rude awakenings.
Oh, dear. The Delaware judge has ruled - again - that Elmo’s package is worthless.
Aw, poor thing, however will he scrape by?
So I read the article, but I’m still unclear as to why this was brought to a judge, (is that common)? And I’m a little unclear as to what the problem is. “Reset” what, exactly? Is she referring to the appeal?
Sorry, and thanks to anyone willin’ to help a bro out, so I can better understand.
A few whispers in the ear of the Orange Peril, and another name gets added to the much-feared Enemies List, and another judge must start making plans to flee the country!
It’s a shareholder lawsuit. Remember that Tesla is a public company. It’s not private. On a day to day basis, it’s run by its executives, but ultimately it’s owned and controlled by its shareholders. The board of directors is supposed to be responsible to them, not to Musk, and they have a fiduciary duty to remain independent and serve the best interests of the company.
This group of shareholders is arguing that this outrageous pay package is out of scale and a financial burden to the company, and more importantly that the board is not independent and is primarily serving Musk’s interests over the company’s. That’s the basic gist of it.
This kind of shareholder lawsuit isn’t terribly common, but it’s not uncommon, either. More frequently, large institutional investors can threaten legal action, using their ownership leverage to compel companies to do things or not do things, and then there’s a negotiation, without the need to go through with the lawsuit. What’s uncommon here is that the judge has sided almost entirely with the shareholder group, accepting their evidence and agreeing with their arguments, and voiding the pay package — partly, again, due to its scale, but more because of how it came to be voted on and agreed by the board.
This article contains a very good explanation. In the quotes from the judge’s opinion, note the emphasis not on the amount of money Musk would receive, but the process by which it was initially approved, and then re-approved after the original judgment. You can agree or disagree, but the reasoning is laid out clearly.
No doubt Musk is scheming right now for a way to get the judge put against the wall in front of a firing squad come January.
A shareholder started the lawsuit saying the board misrepresented the salary package, which apparently they did. The reason the judge rejected the package is that they didn’t fix what she claims in the real problem: the board is full of Elon’s cronies and relatives, and they’re looking out for him instead of the shareholders like they’re supposed to, which is the main reason the package was put forward.
What the board did instead of changing people is put the same deal before shareholders, being more upfront about it, and yes, it passed with 72% of shareholders voting for it. The board is now all “See? See? They’re okay with it!”
What the judge still wants is for them to fix the root problem: appointing a board of directors that is interested in protecting shareholder interests. If they can swap out the board of cronies for an impartial board full of qualified people (qualifications beyond being friends of Elon) and the new board says “Yes, giving a part-time CEO who’s never met a deadline, violates court orders, is a PR nightmare, an HR nightmare, who just this year fired the entire supercharger team during a tantrum and then had to re-hire the entire team, is worth 10% of the company’s market cap” then he’s golden.
Surely they can find six people that aren’t hanging on Elon’s jock who think giving him 1/10th of a trillion on dollars is a good idea?
Thank you to you and @Cervaise.
Encountered on Bluesky today; can’t vouch for its authenticity:
Wouldn’t putting them in a Tesla* have the same effect?
*In ‘Sooper-Dooper-SAFE (Pinky-Swear) / Self-Joyriding / Immolation Mode ALWAYS ON’ Mode…
Are you absolutely sure about that? I would not be surprised if the ToS made postings property of the site (including image uploads).