NBA tenatively approves Clipper sale, Sterling drops lawsuit.

[saltlover]

As much as I think Sterling did a very stupid thing, you still can't take property in this country for something a person says.  Plus what he said was obtained illegally.  Sterling (or whoever represents his interests by the time this is over) is going to win in the end.

1) They're not taking private property.  They forced out a business partner, and he was able to sell on the open market for $2 billion, which was certainly a fair price, if not an excessive price.  Business partners force each other out ALL THE TIME in THIS COUNTRY, for a variety of reasons, including speech.

2) If his words were truly obtained illegally, he has recourse.  He can:

a) press criminal charges
b) sue Stiviano
c) sue TMZ for releasing what they knew to be an illegally recorded conversation.

He has pursued none of these options.

The NBA merely reacted to the fallout.

[LooseCannon]

Plus what he said was obtained illegally.

Given that Sterling was aware of and consented to the recording, is this a talking point that needs to be retired?

[Roy H.]

Plus what he said was obtained illegally.

Given that Sterling was aware of and consented to the recording, is this a talking point that needs to be retired?

Is there any proof of this?  I know it was rumored, but Sterling's attorneys have firmly denied it, including in their briefs submitted to the NBA. 

[D.o.s.]

As much as I think Sterling did a very stupid thing, you still can't take property in this country for something a person says.  Plus what he said was obtained illegally.  Sterling (or whoever represents his interests by the time this is over) is going to win in the end.

1) They're not taking private property.  They forced out a business partner, and he was able to sell on the open market for $2 billion, which was certainly a fair price, if not an excessive price.  Business partners force each other out ALL THE TIME in THIS COUNTRY, for a variety of reasons, including speech.

2) If his words were truly obtained illegally, he has recourse.  He can:

a) press criminal charges
b) sue Stiviano
c) sue TMZ for releasing what they knew to be an illegally recorded conversation.

He has pursued none of these options.

The NBA merely reacted to the fallout.

I don't know why this is such a hurdle for people.

[fairweatherfan]

As much as I think Sterling did a very stupid thing, you still can't take property in this country for something a person says.  Plus what he said was obtained illegally.  Sterling (or whoever represents his interests by the time this is over) is going to win in the end.

1) They're not taking private property.  They forced out a business partner, and he was able to sell on the open market for $2 billion, which was certainly a fair price, if not an excessive price.  Business partners force each other out ALL THE TIME in THIS COUNTRY, for a variety of reasons, including speech.

2) If his words were truly obtained illegally, he has recourse.  He can:

a) press criminal charges
b) sue Stiviano
c) sue TMZ for releasing what they knew to be an illegally recorded conversation.

He has pursued none of these options.

The NBA merely reacted to the fallout.

I don't know why this is such a hurdle for people.

Area Man Passionate Defender of What He Imagines Constitution To Be

So it goes...

[D.o.s.]

Classic.

[hwangjini_1]

As much as I think Sterling did a very stupid thing, you still can't take property in this country for something a person says.  Plus what he said was obtained illegally.  Sterling (or whoever represents his interests by the time this is over) is going to win in the end.

1) They're not taking private property.  They forced out a business partner, and he was able to sell on the open market for $2 billion, which was certainly a fair price, if not an excessive price.  Business partners force each other out ALL THE TIME in THIS COUNTRY, for a variety of reasons, including speech.

2) If his words were truly obtained illegally, he has recourse.  He can:

a) press criminal charges
b) sue Stiviano
c) sue TMZ for releasing what they knew to be an illegally recorded conversation.

He has pursued none of these options.

The NBA merely reacted to the fallout.

I don't know why this is such a hurdle for people.

Area Man Passionate Defender of What He Imagines Constitution To Be

So it goes...

given the topic for this thread and the way events are unfolding, it is completely appropriate that we draw upon the Onion, america's finest news source, for our commentary. 

[LooseCannon]

Plus what he said was obtained illegally.

Given that Sterling was aware of and consented to the recording, is this a talking point that needs to be retired?

Is there any proof of this?  I know it was rumored, but Sterling's attorneys have firmly denied it, including in their briefs submitted to the NBA.

There was a third party in the room who cooperated with the league investigation.  I am fairly confident that the NBA checked out this angle if the legality of the recording matters.  Since Stiviano had recorded other conversations, my guess is that there is at least evidence to back up the idea that she regularly recorded him with his consent.

Either the legality doesn't matter, it matters and the league is competent enough to have some proof, it matters and the league is incompetent, or it matters and the league doesn't care.  I know which option I would bet on.