Fox News says Tucker Carlson breached his contract

[MisterBeale]

We'll see.

IMO? That would be a very difficult argument for any attorney to make a claim that Tucker was violating a, "non-compete clause," by using social media to spread ideas, peer to peer. They would have to prove he is in some sort of conscious collusion with Twitter I believe.

 

[Skylar]

We'll see.

IMO? That would be a very difficult argument for any attorney to make a claim that Tucker was violating a, "non-compete clause," by using social media to spread ideas, peer to peer. They would have to prove he is in some sort of conscious collusion with Twitter I believe.

The same format, same style, same guy, same suit, on the same topics after having been promoted by Twitter, where Twitter is drawing in the same demo and selling ads?

It would be a very simple argument to make that it violates a non-compete clause.

And if Tucker were receiving any financial compensation from Twitter, its even easier.

Fox is reportedly still paying Tucker.

 

[jc456]

This is interesting.

So, we all know that the Murdoch's, Fox Corp. and Tucker had a falling out. Every pundit and their brother has had a theory as to why the most popular news commentary show was cancelled at the height of its popularity.

. . . and of course, Tucker is still under contract, so, technically, he can't go to work for anyone else. Yet.

So? Is Tucker, by making videos on twitter, just making personal content to espouse his views on public events? Or has he breached his contract and become a subcontracting, "employee," for twitter? Bringing in revenue for that platform?

Scoop: Fox News says Tucker Carlson breached his contract​

Scoop: Fox News says Tucker Carlson breached his contract

Fox lawyers notified the former host that his new Twitter show violates his old Fox contract.

www.axios.com

Is this a corporate, contractual issue, that has only to do with money and business?

Or is this a free speech issue, and a battle of the populists and a defense of liberty against the man?

He didn’t render service

 

[jc456]

FOX fired him so as long as he is not bad-mouthing FOX by name he causes them no harm thus they can't show any harm.....Nothing to sue over that will hold up past the first hearing.

He has no particular time slot on Twitter so FOX can't gig him on hurting their ratings either. They did that to themselves when they fired him.

In fact FOX would likely end-up paying any legal expenses Tucker incurs in a likely counter suit.

They didn’t fire him, I told you all back then

 

[Skylar]

He didn’t render service

Producing content for Twitter to sell ads for is a service.

You have no idea what you're talking about.

 

[YoursTruly]

I guess we would need to see the contract, and see what the attorneys are going to argue.

Some would say, he is just a private citizen talking on social media, like anyone else.

I don't think, just because he used to be an employee of a cable news channel, he loses his first amendment rights.

He gave up his rights when he signed the contract... That is IF the contract says he can't report the new for X amount of years after leaving Fox. I think it's called a "non compete clause."

 

[Skylar]

He gave up his rights when he signed the contract... That is IF the contract says he can't report the new for X amount of years after leaving Fox. I think it's called a "non compete clause."

Its not that he gave up his rights. But he will forfeit the money he's being paid by FOX at the very least.

 

[jc456]

He gave up his rights when he signed the contract... That is IF the contract says he can't report the new for X amount of years after leaving Fox. I think it's called a "non compete clause."

Nope

 

[Skylar]

Nope

You have no idea what a non-compete clause is.

 

[AsherN]

They can't prevent Carlson from practicing his profession; all they can do is find a non-compete clause with his production company or something. They can't prevent other companies from hiring him as a regular employee. Been there, done that; all he has to do is move to a right to work state. Screw Fox and the Murdoch kid.

If they have not terminated his contract, they can absolutely demand he only produces content for Fox News. And then never air it.

 

[Skylar]

If they have not terminated his contract, they can absolutely demand he only produces content for Fox News. And then never air it.

Fox is still paying Carlson. They can pay him to do nothing. And prevent him for producing content for anyone else.

 

[theHawk]

He boldly lied.

About what?

 

[DudleySmith]

Dudley doesn't seem to understand what non-compete agreements are.

And if they bought out Carlson's contract, they'd definitely have authority over what content he produces for the duration of the contract.

You don't understand what you're talking about, obviously, just parroting some rubbish or other.

 

[Skylar]

You don't understand what you're talking about, obviously, just parroting some rubbish or other.

Laughing....dude, you asked if a settlement was on appeal.

You're hopelessly out of your depth here, kiddo. You have no idea what is being discussed, don't have the slightest clue what a non-compete is, nor have the knowledge necessary to discuss this topic intelligently.

 

[DudleySmith]

He has a contract with Fox News corporation not to go to work with any other company till after the election.

He has used his own personal twitter account to comment on current events.

Fox News is suing him for that, it wants to silence his ability as a private citizen, from being able to comment on current events, and whatever he feels like commenting on.

BUT YES, his contract does say, he can't do what he used to do, for a specified period of time.

lol there is no law that restricts people from making a living at their profession. They can sue all day long, and it won't change anything. His personal Twitter account isn't a 'production', and neither would being hired to read the news, write articles, etc. as a private individual. They broke their end of a deal and voided any deal they had with him in regard to his show.

 

[DudleySmith]

Fox settles admitting they provided fake news about Dominion

Fox settles admitting they provided fake news about Dominion https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/live/2023/apr/18/fox-news-dominion-defamation-trial-live-updates-us-politics

www.usmessageboard.com

The dominion lawsuit against Fox News And the gullible insane far left response to it

Glenn Greenwald, yes the man who used to be a hero to the left but now apparently they hate for whatever reason covered this story. He talked about the attacks on freedom of speech in America. And I really admire Glenn Greenwald. I don’t know what happened to so many Democrats in this country...

www.usmessageboard.com

And why is Carlson liable for reporting what others said? Again, nobody can answer that.

 

[Skylar]

lol there is no law that restricts people from making a living at their profession.

There are non-compete contracts that certainly prevent people from opening businesses in the same field or working for someone else in the same field for a set period of time after .....unless those folks want want to be in breach of the contract.

"A non-compete agreement is a legal agreement or clause in a contract specifying that an employee must not enter into competition with an employer after the employment period is over. These agreements also prohibit the employee from revealing proprietary information or secrets to any other parties during or after employment.

Many contracts specify a certain length of time when the employee is barred from working for a competitor after they end employment. Employers may require employees to sign non-compete agreements to keep their place in the market. Those required to sign these agreements may include employees, contractors, and consultants."

Remember, you don't have the first clue what you're talking about.

They can sue all day long, and it won't change anything.

They can sue for breach of contract. And there's a decent chance they'll win.

Your ignorance isn't a legal standard.

 

[DudleySmith]

Laughing....dude, you asked if a settlement was on appeal.

You're hopelessly out of your depth here, kiddo. You have no idea what is being discussed, don't have the slightest clue what a non-compete is, nor have the knowledge necessary to discuss this topic intelligently.

We get it, you're an idiot with zero clue to labor law. No need to keep reminding us. The settlement was Fox's, dumbass; you seem unable to grasp basic obvious facts. They can't stop him from working, period. They fired him, dumbass.

 

[DudleySmith]

here are non-compete contracts that certainly prevent people from opening businesses

Is his twitter account airinng at the same time as his old show was? Is it even a show? No, dumbass, it isn't.

 

[Skylar]

We get it, you're an idiot with zero clue to labor law. No need to keep reminding us. The settlement was Fox's, dumbass; you seem unable to grasp basic obvious facts. They can't stop him from working, period. They fired him, dumbass.

You're not quoting labor law. You're quoting yourself. And you don't know what you're talking about.

A non-compete agreement can be used to sue someone if they compete with an employer after leaving.....either by opening their own business, or by working for someone else in the same industry.

You don't understand what a non-compete agreement is. And your ignorance doesn't magically transform into labor laws.