chicagonow.com - 838 views 
Will one woman's tweet cost her $50,000? Read the original post here on ChicagoNow.
Sign Up or Sign In to vote for this story or Read more »
12 comments ↓ What's your take? Post a comment below:
Comments
Whoever hadn't heard about this story on Twitter yet, probably has by now. According to Mashable, the social media guru that has more than 1.1 million followers, this story is spreading really, really fast.
As for my take, Horizon has needlessly created a much bigger mess for itself. Instead of Bonnen's 20+ followers seeing her update, the company has drawn the attention of millions more. And because of this lawsuit, the company will probably be synonymous with "lawsuit/Twitter/mold" from now on.
Oh, the best part:
"We're a 'sue first, ask questions later' kind of an organization"
http://www.suntimes.com/news/metro/1688511,cst-nws-twitter28.article
Just. Wow.
This situation seems absurd to me. I have seen far more things tweeted that should have been sued over. But there is a second part to this that this may put definition on what is considered publishing online.
So if courts rule that tweeting is not publishing, does that mean you are safe from libel when tweeting?
Horizon Reality has issued a press release in response to the incredible response from the Internet.
No one's mentioned the negative reviews of Horizon Realty on Yelp.com yet. I'm guessing they'll probably let those go now, after all the backlash they've generated.
Interesting, I wonder if Horizon even knows that Yelp exists.
I wonder, from what the press release states, if Horizon was just waiting for someone to say something on the Internet that they could prove was false.
She said there was mold, they can prove there wasn't. Think fair comment will still protect her if Twitter is considered publishing?
Megan: Revised headline might also read "Landlord Replies to Tenant Lawsuit with Own, Mold Claim Debunked."
Twitter's viral spread to her 17 followers might have claimed an assertive editor's side bar.
Tenants may resent the power which landlords have to discipline their financial affairs, but this tenant could have purchased her building or a condominium & discovered the challenges of keeping up with its proper repair.
The victim of Love's rants is seeking unspecified punitive damages.
From: Chicago Tribune
What explains popularity of this Twitter suit?
Is it because www.windycitizen.com contributors & visitors must pay their rent or mortgage?
Is that why this story's popularity persits? Twitter? Perry Mason/LA Law courtroom antics?
Our collective comments may become more of a story than the original contribution.
Disclosure: I rent. That said, I'm interested in this suit because it betrays what mind-numbing stupidity the real estate agency in question must show to pursue this. As pointed out at The Volokh Conspiracy, suing over libel tends to drastically increase the audience for the original statement; merely ignoring it is almost always the wiser option. When the suit regards a viral social phenomenon such as Twitter, well ... I'm just blown away by the lack of restraint here. (The agency's claim that the defendant first brought suit against them might explain things, but you have to wonder at comments like "We're a sue-first, ask-questions-later kind of organization.")
I'm interested in this story for a few reasons:
1. This realty company released a sound bite for the ages.
2. As someone who publishes on the web, I'm curious to see how this plays out. We've had folks post some pretty uncomplimentary material to the Citizen in the last few months.
3. It's a webby story with national appeal happening in our backyard. It's been fun watching the different bloggers all rip off the original sources in various ways. Does anyone really have any new info since the story broke?
Counter-suits are often filed to help facilitate a settlement. the original plaintiff's retisence suggests that she may not have been prepared for her celebrity status. Allow me to offer my alternative dispute resolution services.