Filing A Badly Drafted, Mistargeted, Bullshit SLAPP Suit Is No Way To Convince Women You’re Not An Asshole

Dating can be difficult, but there are certain things you can do to not make things worse on yourself. Don't be a creep. Be kind. Take no for an answer. Actually listen to the people you date. I mean, that's kinda the standard stuff.

But also, if things go bad and they complain about you online, don't file the single dumbest lawsuit on the planet in retaliation.

Nikko D'Ambrosio was apparently unable to follow at least one (and possibly more!) of those simple rules. Nikko, a 32-year-old Chicago man (old enough to know better), apparently dated around a bit, then lost his shit when he discovered that some of the women he dated went to the Facebook group Are We Dating the Same Guy" to offer what were mostly pretty mild complaints about him.

Very clingy very fast," the woman commented. Flaunted money very awkwardly and kept talking about how I don't want to see his bad side."

More screenshots showed the woman - who commented as an anonymous member - claimed that after she blocked D'Ambrosio's number, he used a different number to send her a text in which it appears he attacked her appearance.

Nikko didn't too much like this. And the guy once described as very clingy very fast" who allegedly told someone you don't want to see his bad side" showed off his bad side in filing this very obvious SLAPP suit against basically anyone he could think of. There are 56 total defendants, including 29 women (some of whom are just relatives of the people he's actually mad at). There are also 22 variations on Meta/Facebook. While the company has multiple corporate entities, you do not need to sue them all. For good measure, he also sued Patreon and GoFundMe, because why not?

It's not at all clear why he sued all of those defendants. Most of the individual defendants are not clearly connected to this case. The case only names one woman who he says made defamatory comments about him (they're not, but we'll get to that). The rest are just... thrown in there and never explained. Did they like or share the original comments? Who knows. It does appear he sued family members of the main woman he's mad at, again, for what?

There are so, so, so many problems with the lawsuit I've literally restarted this paragraph about six times as I change my mind on which to cover first. But let's start here: Section 230. As far as I can tell, D'Ambrosio's lawyers have never heard of it. The complaint doesn't address it. But it easily bars the lawsuit against all of the many Facebook defendants, as well as Patreon and GoFundMe. He also sues AWDTSG Inc., which is apparently a company that helps to run a series of local Are We Dating the Same Guy" groups on Facebook, which is what Nikko is particularly pissed at.

Section 230 says that for things like defamation, you get to sue the party who said the actual defamatory thing, not the website that hosts the speech. Should the case even get that far (and it's not clear that it will), all the Facebook/Meta parties, GoFundme, Patreon, and AWDTSG will easily get their cases tossed on 230 grounds. Having a lawyer file a lawsuit like this without understanding (or even attempting to address) Section 230 seems like malpractice.

Indeed, the lawyers who filed this lawsuit, Marc Trent and Dan Nikolic, kind of parade their ignorance. In the lawsuit they claim that because of Defendants content moderation responsibilities" they would have had to review" the posts, and that makes them liable for the alleged defamation. But, um, Section 230 was passed directly to deal with exactly that scenario, and to say that, no, reviewing posts doesn't make you liable.

And Section 230 protects not just interactive computer services" but users" who pass along third party content. So even if he's suing people for sharing or liking the comments he's mad about, all of those defendants are protected by Section 230 as well.

It's stunning that the lawyers in question seem wholly unaware of this.

Next up, defamation. Nothing in the suit appears even remotely close to defamation. The statements all appear to be statements of opinion about what kind of creepy jerk Nikko is. Sorry, Nikko, people are allowed to have opinions of you. That's not defamation. Nearly all of the statements are clearly opinion statements. And, no, it may not feel great, but opinions that you're very clingy, very fast" are not defamatory.

Also, in a defamation suit, you plead which statements were defamatory, including why they are false and defamatory. This complaint does not do that.

Next, they're trying to use Illinois' brand new (just went into effect this year!) doxxing" law, claiming that talking about him and posting his picture violates the law. Now, I think there are some potential 1st Amendment issues with that law, and they're really driven home by using it here. But to try to make sure that this law is on the correct side of the 1st Amendment, it says that the law is not violated when the speech in question is activity protected under the United States Constitution," and boy, lemme tell ya, calling a dude very clingy" sure qualifies.

There are a bunch of other pretty big legal problems with the lawsuit that are just embarrassing. Ken Popehat" White covered many of them in his post on this subject. The big one, suggesting that the lawyers have little (if any) familiarity with federal court, is that to file in federal court over state law claims, you have to show diversity," meaning that the parties in the case are all in different states. And White notes how badly they fucked that up:

D'Ambrosio's lawyers assert diversity jurisdiction but make an utter dumpster fire out of it. They admit that both D'Ambrosio and at least one of the defendants come from Illinois, which defeats diversity jurisdiction. They admit they don't know what state a bunch of the defendants come from. They identify a bunch of the defendants as limited liability companies, but don't plead the facts necessary to identify those entities' citizenship for purposes of diversity. This is the kind of thing that makes federal judges issue orders of their own accord saying, in judicial terms, what the fuck is this shit?"

Also, the lawyers claim it's a class action" lawsuit, and are actively seeking to recruit more plaintiffs on Reddit, naturally (where - hilariously - the person who originally posted the topic asked the lawyers if they wanted him to start a GoFundMe, apparently not realizing GoFundMe was one of the defendants in the case). Class action defamation lawsuits aren't really a thing, because for it to be defamation it has to be a statement about a specific person, and the specifics matter. But even beyond that, if you're filing a class action lawsuit, you have to take some steps, and as White points out, these lawyers didn't do that:

The caption of the lawsuit proclaims that it's a class action, and D'Ambrosio's lawyers have made comments suggesting that they see themselves as suing on behalf of victims" other than D'Ambrosio. But other than the caption, the lawsuit contains not a single relevant allegation about being a class action. It doesn't plead any of the factors necessary to qualify as a class action. It's also obviously unsuited to be a class action: a class action requires a pool of plaintiffs with factually and legally similar claims, but defamation claims are by their nature very individual and context-specific, and each aggrieved man's case would be very different depending on what was said about them.

White notes that the lawsuit is so badly drafted that he expects it may get dismissed just on the jurisdictional problems without defendants even having to file anything. He also suggests it's so bad that it could lead to sanctions from the judge.

But, also, this is exactly the kind of case for which I coined the term Streisand Effect nearly twenty years ago. Doing this kind of shit won't protect your reputation, it will destroy your reputation. And, again as White points out, a good lawyer would warn you of that before filing this sort of lawsuit. Whether or not they warned him about it, the lawsuit has been filed and now the allegedly very clingy, very fast" guy who might be very awkward" is, well, having his reputation spread pretty far and wide.

And there are many, many more. So rather than just the types of people who hang out on the Are We Dating the Same Guy" Facebook groups, now many, many, many more people - some of whom I'd assume are in the dating pool in the Chicago area - are aware of Nikko D'Ambrosio and his reputation. And not just his reputation for being very clingy, very fast, but his reputation for filing bullshit SLAPP suits to try to silence women for expressing their opinion of him.

Hopefully the judge does dump the case. While Illinois does have a decent anti-SLAPP law (which would clearly apply here), the 7th Circuit has suggested it does not apply in federal court (of course, because of the jurisdiction issues, this case doesn't apply there either, but... whatever).

More importantly, this is a case that demonstrates yet again why Section 230 is so important to protect people against harassment like this very lawsuit. Without Section 230, it becomes way easier to abuse the legal system to try to silence women who point out that you're a creep. Section 230 protects that kind of information sharing.

The whole case is a mess of epic proportions. It's a lawsuit that never should have been filed, but now that it has, congrats to Nikko D'Ambrosio for making sure every dating-eligible woman in Chicago knows to avoid you.