39
submitted 11 months ago by El_Dorado@beehaw.org to c/asklemmy@lemmy.ml

I was reading about the allegations against Russell Brand and couldn't help but wonder how it works legally that his revenue can be blocked based on allegations and before any juridical ruling.

Don't get me wrong I don't know much about the guy and what he did or didn't do and agree that anyone should be punished according to their crimes.

But how is this possible with the principal of innocent until proven guilty? I'd be happy if someone could explain me.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[-] moody@lemmings.world 2 points 11 months ago

It's much more lucrative to have a creator continue to make content and bring in ad revenue than to shut them down and keep what their current offerings bring in.

Why would I steal a million from you and shut you down when you bring in a million a month for me? All I would need to do to make up that money is to wait for you to put out more content.

this post was submitted on 19 Sep 2023
39 points (88.2% liked)

Asklemmy

43324 readers
972 users here now

A loosely moderated place to ask open-ended questions

Search asklemmy ๐Ÿ”

If your post meets the following criteria, it's welcome here!

  1. Open-ended question
  2. Not offensive: at this point, we do not have the bandwidth to moderate overtly political discussions. Assume best intent and be excellent to each other.
  3. Not regarding using or support for Lemmy: context, see the list of support communities and tools for finding communities below
  4. Not ad nauseam inducing: please make sure it is a question that would be new to most members
  5. An actual topic of discussion

Looking for support?

Looking for a community?

~Icon~ ~by~ ~@Double_A@discuss.tchncs.de~

founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS