“I recall that Dr Disrespect was made aware by the individual that they were underage during the conversation, after which he indicated that this was no problem and continued on,” the former employee says. “There was no confusion. Messages sent after this was acknowledged were no less graphic and in sexually explicit nature than before, and I think more than the categorization of ‘leaning too much in the direction of being inappropriate’ might indicate.”

  • William@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    43
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    5 months ago

    Because what he did wasn’t illegal. It was just wrong. They didn’t want anything to do with him any more, but he didn’t break the law and so they couldn’t use that part of the contract to terminate it.

    They felt it was so wrong that they paid him $20mil to break that contract. They absolutely would have taken another option if it was viable.

    • tacosanonymous@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      5 months ago

      Seems like an easy thing to put into contracts. Like, who would argue against that clause?

    • FiniteBanjo@lemmy.today
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      21
      ·
      edit-2
      5 months ago

      I’m not defending any potential actions he took, but:

      There are laws about sexting minors, so if he had done that then he would have broken it and they would have plenty of evidence of that.

      If nobody above 18 is morally justified to be in a chat with anybody under 18 then we’ve got some serious societal level issues to fix.

      EDIT: And btw they tried to get out of paying him 20M, but realized they had no grounds to do so when he started his lawsuit. They had incentive, here. They wanted to not pay him.

      • William@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        5 months ago

        There are things that you shouldn’t do or say to minors that aren’t illegal, but anyone reading them would still know it’s it’s unethical/wrong/immoral/whatever. They clearly thought he crossed that line, enough that they’d rather fire him and take a chance on losing the court case for damages for breaking the contract. And then they lost that court case.

        It clearly wasn’t just “a chat with a minor”. The rumors I’ve heard is that he was attempting to make plans to meet up with them at a convention. That would definitely be in the “big no no” category for a celebrity talking to a minor, even if nothing untoward was suggested in that conversation.