Submit your comments on this article |
-Short Attention Span Theater- |
Federal judge sends Huffington posters packing |
2012-03-31 |
![]() Rantburg.com A federal judge in New York state Friday dismissed claims that bloggers who had provided content without compensation should be compensated, according to US wire and blog reports. Judge U.S. District Judge John Koeltl said in the dismissal order that the plaintiffs entered their agreements with Ariana Huffington, founder of The Huffington Post, "with eyes wide open" and that they are not entitled to any part of the $105 million in damages alleged in the lawsuit. The lawsuit was brought just after Huffington sold her highly successful news aggregation website to AOL last year for a reported $315 million. Allegations in the lawsuit were that Huffington had unjustly enriched herself at the expense of several bloggers who had provided content over the years, a claim Judge Koetl dismissed. In the dismissal order Judge Koeltl said that in order for a unjust enrichment compensation to be determined under law, an expectation of compensation was to be explicit in the arrangements between Huffington and her bloggers. Instead, the only thing of value Huffington offered was exposure. The plaintiffs, in the person of Jonathan Tasini, Tara Dublin, Richard Laermer and Billy Altman, among many others also alleged that they were recruited by Huffington to provide content in exchange for exposure, and use social media such as Twitter to promote their articles and increase visits to the Huffington post. The claim the plaintiffs should receive some part of the $315 million purchase price Huffington reportedly received in the sale of the website was dismissed. It is known that many other bloggers were formerly with print media, who had been placed on the outs by consolidation and by job losses in the print media business, mainly newspaper and other print media, and had been hoping they would return to their former positions through their work with The Huffington Post. Judge Koeltl also said many of those writers and bloggers were not kept in their positions at The Huffington Post, that the writers who provided content could have taken other offers during the time in question. The Huffington Post was set up in May 2005 using money provided by several investors. Before she sold her website, Huffington continually returned to her investors for more money to keep her website running. At one point a year before she sold out to AOL, the Huffington Post was losing a reported $1 million a month. The Huffington Post also used paid writers and editors during it six year run before being sold. Chris Covert writes news for Rantburg.com |
Posted by:badanov |
#7 Oh, and about the original article... I'm reminded of that line from Animal House. Basically, they F###ed up, they trusted her. |
Posted by: Thing From Snowy Mountain 2012-03-31 15:47 |
#6 Who gets the royalties from all the records? |
Posted by: Thing From Snowy Mountain 2012-03-31 15:46 |
#5 Don't feel bad, Frank G. It's worth a chuckle now and then. |
Posted by: Abu Uluque 2012-03-31 13:35 |
#4 The most surprising thing here is finding out that AOL actually had 315 million to give to this ditz. |
Posted by: tu3031 2012-03-31 12:28 |
#3 I demanded that Fred pay me for what my comments were worth. He said "you have been". Damn... |
Posted by: Frank G 2012-03-31 11:18 |
#2 "Now that ain't workin' that's the way you do it You play the guitar on the mtv That ain't workin' that's the way you do it Money for nothin' and your chicks for free Money for nothin' and chicks for free" |
Posted by: JohnQC 2012-03-31 09:57 |
#1 ![]() Stupid liberals. They always think things should be the way they think they should be, rather than how they are. You were offered exposure and that's it. Someone got rich of your work? That's your fault, not theirs. Personal responsibility. |
Posted by: gromky 2012-03-31 07:31 |