Jonathan Adler (Case Western), SSRN Removes Tutorial Paper Attributable to Defamation Declare:
Professor Ann Lipton, a famous company regulation scholar at Tulane, has a brand new paper, “Capital Discrimination”, discussing gender discrimination in enterprise disputes. When she accomplished her draft she posted the article on SSRN and submitted it regulation evaluations, as one does, and obtained a proposal of publication from the Houston Regulation Evaluate. Then the paper attracted some unfavorable consideration.
In December, attorneys for Philip R. Shawe despatched a cease-and-desist letter to SSRN, demanding that the paper be eliminated, alleging that the paper’s characterization of and commentary on Shawe’s conduct in a nasty enterprise dispute had been defamatory.
Ann Lipton (Tulane), An Replace on My Paper, Capital Discrimination:
On New 12 months’s Day, SSRN eliminated the paper in response to Shawe’s letter. After that, Houston Regulation Evaluate might now not guarantee me that the article would run in its journal, and said that they’d not preclude me from submitting the paper for publication elsewhere.
Tulane’s counsel has despatched a response letter to SSRN in hopes of getting the paper restored however for now, to make sure that the paper isn’t saved out of sight indefinitely, I’ve made a duplicate out there at this hyperlink. This draft of the paper features a reference to Mr. Shawe’s defamation claims.
Scott H. Greenfield (Easy Justice), When SSRN Caved:
Paradoxically, neither this text nor Shawe’s escapades would possible be of a lot concern to anybody exterior of a small circle of buddies however for this effort to reminiscence gap it, and SSRN’s and Houston Regulation Evaluate’s capitulation to the demand. Now that Russo compelled the problem by attempting to hide Shawe’s conduct, and SSRN’s whimpering resounded throughout the authorized academy, the problem is now not about whether or not enterprise associations between women and men must be reimagined by the lens of intercourse discrimination. Now, the Streisand Impact (hello, Mike Masnick!) kicks in and lots of people will study how Shawe engaged in some very embarrassing conduct and the way SSRN can’t be trusted to not run scared on the first point out of a menace.
And never for nothing, however even when Russo’s menace, and Shawe’s humiliation, had any meat to it, it’s not as if SSRN wasn’t protected by Part 230 of the Communications Decency Act anyway as merely the repository of the article. Was there nobody at SSRN who both knew the regulation or had the heart to reply to Russo, “chew me”? As for the Houston Regulation Evaluate, it’s put out by the “good” youngsters at a regulation college so expectations of knowledge and braveness are considerably decrease.
Tulane prawf Ann Lipton wrote a regulation evaluate article. Prefer it or not, publish it on SSRN and within the Houston Regulation Evaluate. Present some free speech fortitude, students.
https://taxprof.typepad.com/taxprof_blog/2022/02/ssrn-removes-paper-by-ann-lipton-tulane-due-to-defamation-claim-law-review-may-rescind-publication-offer.html
