Re:YouTube to remove content that alleges widespread electio...
by mindslight on Friday December 11, 2020 @12:37PM
(#25388337)
I'm not a legal expert either. My understanding is that the heading of each complaint is a summary, and the sections form a progression of supporting allegations.
For example if you read into the next complaint, 142 is strictly factual (which can still be rebutted, but probably won't be), while 145/149 argue why those (factual) actions were unlawful, in support of the complaint's title (the rest are somewhere in the middle, or more handwavey). If you read 142-149, you come away seeing a coherent argument backing up the claim.
But for the previous complaint - it's a claim the law was violated, a citation of the law, and then no supporting argument or evidence detailing how or why the law has been violated. I'm guessing it can be amended or argued verbally, but as it stands it's an unsupported claim.
For example if you read into the next complaint, 142 is strictly factual (which can still be rebutted, but probably won't be), while 145/149 argue why those (factual) actions were unlawful, in support of the complaint's title (the rest are somewhere in the middle, or more handwavey). If you read 142-149, you come away seeing a coherent argument backing up the claim.
But for the previous complaint - it's a claim the law was violated, a citation of the law, and then no supporting argument or evidence detailing how or why the law has been violated. I'm guessing it can be amended or argued verbally, but as it stands it's an unsupported claim.