Skip to content
 
If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Las Vegas Review Journal)   NFL asks Nevada court to dismiss Jon Gruden lawsuit. No one wants to root for either of these arsehats, but more exposed emails exposing more arsehats would be great   (reviewjournal.com) divider line
    More: Obvious, Roger Goodell, National Football League, National Football League Players Association, Jon Gruden, Oakland Raiders, 2008 Tampa Bay Buccaneers season, commissioner Roger Goodell, Monday Night Football  
•       •       •

277 clicks; posted to Sports » on 20 Jan 2022 at 5:05 PM (17 weeks ago)   |   Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook



15 Comments     (+0 »)
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest
 
2022-01-20 4:52:24 PM  
I don't see how Gruden has any case here. The only way he could expect any sort of privacy in his emails is if they were to only his spouse, lawyers, or doctor. Even then, the privacy would be very limited.
 
2022-01-20 5:56:14 PM  

ArkAngel: I don't see how Gruden has any case here. The only way he could expect any sort of privacy in his emails is if they were to only his spouse, lawyers, or doctor. Even then, the privacy would be very limited.


If his privacy was violated and it's not that big a deal, then let's release all those emails. All 600,000 of them

I'm sure there's nothing bad in there
 
2022-01-20 6:01:32 PM  

ArkAngel: I don't see how Gruden has any case here. The only way he could expect any sort of privacy in his emails is if they were to only his spouse, lawyers, or doctor. Even then, the privacy would be very limited.


Unless it's a lawyer, therapist, or doctor, something where confidentiality is required, yeah, there is no privacy expected in emails.

And if they were done over nfl emails (I don't even know if that's a thing, but I assume it is) then you literally have absolutely no right to privacy.  Your company owns all of them and can use them against you at any time.  So if you want to do something illegal (or in this case, racist and stupid), don't do it over company emails.  That's a very bad idea.
 
2022-01-20 6:09:02 PM  

pastramithemosterotic: ArkAngel: I don't see how Gruden has any case here. The only way he could expect any sort of privacy in his emails is if they were to only his spouse, lawyers, or doctor. Even then, the privacy would be very limited.

If his privacy was violated and it's not that big a deal, then let's release all those emails. All 600,000 of them

I'm sure there's nothing bad in there


A) There's not 600k emails.  Unless you mean literally every email ever sent by anyone in the history of the NFL.... but why?

B) If there's something/someone being investigated for a legal case of some kind, releasing them is a HORRIBLE idea.  You don't do that for a number of reasons.
 
2022-01-20 6:14:20 PM  

jake3988: pastramithemosterotic: ArkAngel: I don't see how Gruden has any case here. The only way he could expect any sort of privacy in his emails is if they were to only his spouse, lawyers, or doctor. Even then, the privacy would be very limited.

If his privacy was violated and it's not that big a deal, then let's release all those emails. All 600,000 of them

I'm sure there's nothing bad in there

A) There's not 600k emails.  Unless you mean literally every email ever sent by anyone in the history of the NFL.... but why?

B) If there's something/someone being investigated for a legal case of some kind, releasing them is a HORRIBLE idea.  You don't do that for a number of reasons.


600k emails really isn't that many. Think about it this way- league-wide announcements would go out to every employee and each person's copy of the email counts against that number individually. Now apply that same logic for each recipient on every email chain.
 
2022-01-20 6:24:55 PM  
Any league that kicks the Gruden but lets Dwarf Snyder own a team deserves a tragedy.
 
2022-01-20 6:41:13 PM  

ArkAngel: I don't see how Gruden has any case here. The only way he could expect any sort of privacy in his emails is if they were to only his spouse, lawyers, or doctor. Even then, the privacy would be very limited.


The league knew about the emails by June at the latest, and they get released in October.  On the surface he has a case for tortuous interference.
 
2022-01-20 7:09:51 PM  

ArkAngel: I don't see how Gruden has any case here. The only way he could expect any sort of privacy in his emails is if they were to only his spouse, lawyers, or doctor. Even then, the privacy would be very limited.


I think the case is that it was limited to him. He has no Title VII coverage, ADEA doesn't apply as all the others that could potentially have been implicated are above 40, but there HAS to be some legal standing that says "hey, I was singled out for something that was wide-spread." Not defending him, implicating others (hello Mr. Snyder, et al)
 
2022-01-20 8:54:54 PM  
I don't know.  I guess it depends on what the lawsuit is about.  If Gruden is alleging the league conspired to release damaging emails in order to force him out of his contract then one would think the NFL's argument that the emails were not private 1) is a non sequitur in regards to the allegations and 2) contradicts their assertation that they don't have to release any related emails in discovery.
 
2022-01-20 9:04:52 PM  

full8me: I don't know.  I guess it depends on what the lawsuit is about.  If Gruden is alleging the league conspired to release damaging emails in order to force him out of his contract then one would think the NFL's argument that the emails were not private 1) is a non sequitur in regards to the allegations and 2) contradicts their assertation that they don't have to release any related emails in discovery.


There is no such thing as a private e-mail.
 
2022-01-20 11:02:41 PM  
Not defending Gruden, but this whole thing stinks.  Gruden did what he did and should be gone, but he was singled out in hopes of burying any and everything else.
 
2022-01-20 11:58:50 PM  

UNC_Samurai: ArkAngel: I don't see how Gruden has any case here. The only way he could expect any sort of privacy in his emails is if they were to only his spouse, lawyers, or doctor. Even then, the privacy would be very limited.

The league knew about the emails by June at the latest, and they get released in October.  On the surface he has a case for tortuous interference.


Is that a spot foul?
 
2022-01-21 8:58:38 AM  

BlazeTrailer: UNC_Samurai: ArkAngel: I don't see how Gruden has any case here. The only way he could expect any sort of privacy in his emails is if they were to only his spouse, lawyers, or doctor. Even then, the privacy would be very limited.

The league knew about the emails by June at the latest, and they get released in October.  On the surface he has a case for tortuous interference.

Is that a spot foul?


No.  15 yards and loss of down.
 
2022-01-21 9:52:15 AM  

BunkyBrewman: BlazeTrailer: UNC_Samurai: ArkAngel: I don't see how Gruden has any case here. The only way he could expect any sort of privacy in his emails is if they were to only his spouse, lawyers, or doctor. Even then, the privacy would be very limited.

The league knew about the emails by June at the latest, and they get released in October.  On the surface he has a case for tortuous interference.

Is that a spot foul?

No.  15 yards and loss of down.


There is no privacy for e-mail, comes with the territory.
 
2022-01-21 4:32:53 PM  

mjbok: Not defending Gruden, but this whole thing stinks.  Gruden did what he did and should be gone, but he was singled out in hopes of burying any and everything else.


In this case, Snyder and the bullshiat he was pulling.
 
Displayed 15 of 15 comments

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking




On Twitter


  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.