this post was submitted on 25 Dec 2023
400 points (97.6% liked)

Technology

59377 readers
4800 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.

Our Rules

  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related content.
  3. Be excellent to each another!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed

Approved Bots

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
L3s@lemmy.world
L3s@fry.gs
L4s@fry.gs
L4s@lemmy.world
enu@lemmy.world
400
Reuters has taken down -- globally -- an important hacking-for-profit investigation that included details about an Indian hacking entrepreneur -- because he got a court in that country to say so. (mastodon.world)
submitted 10 months ago by i_have_no_enemies@lemmy.world to c/technology@lemmy.world
22 comments fedilink hide all child comments
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] ohwhatfollyisman@lemmy.world 48 points 10 months ago (3 children)

just a minor clarification. the court did not order the article to he taken down. the court just said that the article constitutes defamation.

it was Reuter's decision to therefore take down the article. in OP's first link, there's info of other media houses that have also pulled such stories.

blame the scummy lawyers protecting the scumbag and his predatory behaviour.

[–] Vash63@lemmy.world 30 points 10 months ago (2 children)

What's the difference between the court saying it's defamation, and thus illegal to publish and worthy of awarding damages, and ordering it taken down? Seems like splitting hairs.