So, am I reading this correct? Adult industry attorney Lawrence Walters is defending RedTube in their case?
http://www.xbiz.com/news/web/111009
http://www.xbiz.com/news/web/111009
-
-
"attorney Lawrence Walters, who represents several of the defendants in the suit,"
There were a few defendants listed, he might not be defending redtube. Hard to say from the article.Webmaster Coupons Coupons and discounts for hosting, domains, SSL Certs, and more!
AmeriNOC Coupons | Certified Hosting Coupons | Hosting Coupons | Domain Name Coupons
-
interesting
FUBAR Webmasters - The FUBAR Times - FUBAR Webmasters Mobile - FUBARTV.XXX
For promo opps contact jfk at fubarwebmasters dot comComment
-
That's a bust.icq 156131086Comment
-
what did you expect from an attorney?History will be kind to me for I intend to write it.Comment
-
Don't forget a lot of the advertisers on RedTube were named as defendents. Its more likely he's defending those advertisers and not RedTube directly.
WGI play with Google.Comment
-
It sounds to me as he is defending the advertisers. Whether he has been hired by RedTube is unknown at least from his quote.Comment
-
Was there ever any disclosure of who exactly runs Redtube?
I wonder if anyone representing Redtube even showed up.Comment
-
Comment
-
well, that didnt take long......
LOS ANGELES ? A judge has ruled in favor of some of the defendants in the lawsuit filed by TeenRevenue founder Kevin Cammarata against tube site RedTube and its advertisers
...dismissed the case against the advertisers based on SLAPP grounds
The judge's order, which was issued July 20, granted the advertisers' motion that the suit violated a California anti-SLAPP statute.
The attorney for Cammarata was not available when XBIZ called.Comment
-
your surprised. lolComment
-
-
its also been said that Darth Vader was lukes father so who knowsI could give two shits wether you read this sig or not.Comment
-
Just a thought off the top of my head (no real proof or accusations of this on my part) but wouldn't it be a hoot if redtube was owned by the same entity as pornhub ? Just my 2 cents.Last edited by peeperpimp; 07-28-2009, 11:42 AM.
ICQ: 377517467
peeperpimp (at) yahoo (dot) com
Comment
-
A hoot in the sense that it would cause another scandle tube thread. As far if it would matter, it doesn't, not to me, thats why I ended my post saying it was just my 2 cents, and I was also clear as far as it being a thought off the top of my head. Thats simply what popped into my head from reading some of the responses in here. ICQ: 377517467
peeperpimp (at) yahoo (dot) com
Comment
-
Come see Larry and others speak on the panel I'm moderating at Internext on the 7th... Good time for you to ask questions.
The Content Wars: Are Tube Sites Driving the Industry Down the Tubes?Comment
-
Oops
I thought it was clear to begin with, but as one of my old communications profs used to say, you have to get it across to the other person, that's why they call it communication.
The questionable paragraph has been revised, with bold copy added:
Thanks for pointing this out."The lawsuit is an example of what is known as a SLAPP ["Strategic Lawsuit Against Public Participation"] suit," attorney Lawrence Walters ? who represents Internet hosting company Choopa.com and RedTube advertisers Bangbus.com, Generation Financial d/b/a Videosz.com, and Fling.com in the suit ? told XBIZ. "It's not allowed under California law, and the court recognized ? at least with respect to the advertisers ? that this is a SLAPP suit and granted our motion and dismissed the case against the advertisers based on SLAPP grounds. The next issue to be determined is the amount of attorneys fees owed to our clients."
--tTod Hunter
Proprietor
Tod-Hunter.net
Porn. Politics. Mainstream.
http://tod-hunter.net
tod at tod hyphen hunter dot net
AIM: TodHunterComment
-
shed some light
Comment