Fox News says Tucker Carlson breached his contract

[Skylar]

Actually he merely claims some cases are enforceable; since you don't know squat you have no idea what the distinctions are.

Says the guy that didn't even know what non-compete agreements were until i told him.

Read up, kiddo.

"A non-competition agreement (“non-compete”) prohibits an employee from working for a competitor or opening a competing business, typically for a certain period of time after an employee leaves a job. A non-compete may be one section of an employment contract or a standalone contract that an employee signs before or after employment begins."

https://ag.ny.gov/sites/default/files/non-competes.pdf

Yes, non-compete agreements exist. Yes, they're enforceable. Yes, the courts have long since upheld them.

So much for your imaginary 'precedent'.

 

[DudleySmith]

So, no OKTexas. Dud has jackshit for precedent. Dud's only source.....is Dudley.

Meanwhile, the NY Attorney General is clear as a bell as to what non-compete agreements are.

A non-competition agreement (“non-compete”) prohibits an employee from working for a competitor or opening a competing business, typically for a certain period of time after an employee leaves a job. A non-compete may be one section of an employment contract or a standalone contract that an employee signs before or after employment begins."

https://ag.ny.gov/sites/default/files/non-competes.pdf

So again you prove you don't know squat. Congratulations, you've repeated yourself many times. I bet you wish you knew how to look up case law, eh? But then you would be proving yourself to be an idiot. lol

 

[Skylar]

So again you prove you don't know squat. Congratulations, you've repeated yourself many times. I bet you wish you knew how to look up case law, eh? But then you would be proving yourself to be an idiot. lol

Yawning....and where's that imaginary precedent that 'says that Fox News will lose'?

 

[DudleySmith]

Yawning....and where's that imaginary precedent that 'says that Fox News will lose'?

The ones you have no idea how to find, since you don't even know where to look. lol

 

[Skylar]

The ones you have no idea how to find, since you don't even know where to look. lol

Laughing.....so, nothing.

 

[OKTexas]

How about you educate yourself with basic knowledge before posting in threads, so you don't have to rely on others to educate you.

Personally I think you're full of shit, I'm just giving you the opportunity to prove me wrong.

.

 

[DudleySmith]

Personally I think you're full of shit, I'm just giving you the opportunity to prove me wrong.

.

Personally I know you're a dumbass, like your skoolmate Sklar.

 

[DudleySmith]

Laughing.....so, nothing.

^lol so nothing. I guess that passes for 'wit' in Stoner Land.

 

[Skylar]

^lol so nothing. I guess that passes for 'wit' in Stoner Land.

So more excuses why you can't cite your imaginary 'precedent' that says 'Fox News will lose'?

Color me shocked!

 

[DudleySmith]

So more excuses why you can't cite your imaginary 'precedent' that says 'Fox News will lose'?

Color me shocked!

Still begging for others to tell you what to read.

Color me not shocked at all.

 

[AsherN]

They fired him, dumbass.

No, they didn't They are still paying him under his contract until 2025. He is technically still an employee of Fox. They just don't use him. And as an employee, they can dictate what he can and can't do.

 

[DudleySmith]

No, they didn't They are still paying him under his contract until 2025. He is technically still an employee of Fox. They just don't use him. And as an employee, they can dictate what he can and can't do.

First he's not an employee, then the claim is that he is an employee. lol none of it is going to fly in a real court. His profession is print and broadcast journalist; they can not take him off the air and then deny him seeking work elsewhere; paying him under such circumstances doesn't mean squat. They can't legally ruin his career, and without seeing the contract nobody here can claim otherwise;the contract may merely cover being a contract producer, for one, in which case the contract is with his production company, and he's free to be an employee anywhere he wants and they hire him as an employee. To claim he's still employed they have to prove he's still working and they're holding up their end of the production agreement, i.e. for however many episodes they contracted him for, as an example. It's clear they aren't. He's an employee of his company? Makes no difference, he can quit working for his own company same as any other employee can.

 

[jc456]

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

Nope. He didn’t render any services. Read the contract

 

[jc456]

So what? He's a news caster; he can work on someone else's show all day long. There is no law saying he can't work, period. Such contracts aren't worth the paper they're written on. He's not 'starting another business' by commenting on Twitter. If one is a mechanic with his own tools and shop with a franchise from someone else, and that franchise cancels his franchise, he is free to go to work for another company as a mechanic. They can't keep him from working for any length of time as an employee for someone else.

Fox better watch out, they will disclose twitter as a legitimate news outlet that demofks says it ain’t. They can’t stop freedom of speech on a social outlet

 

[jc456]

lol good luck with that. Most people have already looked it up, and can even cite the cases, while you just babble idiot crap you got from some hack site.

Trump talking points

 

[jc456]

Personally I think you're full of shit, I'm just giving you the opportunity to prove me wrong.

.

Don’t you know every demfk in here is an expert at everything ?

Hahaha hahaha. Talking points

 

[DudleySmith]

Fox better watch out, they will disclose twitter as a legitimate news outlet that demofks says it ain’t. They can’t stop freedom of speech on a social outlet

Twitter isn't a calve news channel, so where is the 'competition', anyway??? It's just stupid petty harrassment, which of course is why all the commies and faggots are so supportive of the suit.

 

[DudleySmith]

Trump talking points

Nope, all mine; I haven't read a thing Trump has said about any of it; we all know what it is from the second they started their sleazy sham.

 

[Blaster]

Fox better watch out, they will disclose twitter as a legitimate news outlet that demofks says it ain’t. They can’t stop freedom of speech on a social outlet

Fox News doesn't have a leg to stand on.

 

[MisterBeale]

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.

Well, we are just speculating on the outcome.

If, when he agreed to these terms, he failed to run it by his attorneys, or his attorney felt it did not conflict with the non-compete clause? I guess, that is why it has landed in court.

Developer Agreement and Policy – Twitter Developers

Developer Agreement and Policy – Twitter Developers

developer.twitter.com

https://cdn.cms-twdigitalassets.com/content/dam/legal-twitter/asset-download-files/TheTwitterUserAgreement_1.pdf

The X rules: safety, privacy, authenticity, and more

Understand the limitations on the type of content and behavior that we allow, to ensure free and safe conversation.

help.twitter.com

OTH?

If the arbitrators, judge, jury etc. see no conflict between the non-compete contract and these? Then the case will be thrown out.