The original owner of pitchfork.tumblr.com has his own response with a screenshot of an email from Tumblr stating that they didn't ask him before reassigning it:
From Tumblr's TOS:
"Tumblr reserves the right to remove any Subscriber Content from the Site, suspend or terminate Subscriber’s right to use the Services at any time, or pursue any other remedy or relief available to Tumblr and/or the Site under equity or law, for any reason...or for no reason at all."
Just because they can, does it mean they should have?
It doesn't seem like a fair assumption that the account is abandoned if there are a few posts form the past year, especially when Tumblr didn't contact the user (assuming they did not).
It sucks, but you get what you pay for.
I can't say that the original owner has made the best case for himself. Throwing around terms like "libel" and "exercise my right" is off-putting and makes it hard to empathize with him.
Just because they can, does it mean they should have? It doesn't seem like a fair assumption that the account is abandoned if there are a few posts form the past year, especially when Tumblr didn't contact the user (assuming they did not).
It sucks, but you get what you pay for.
I can't say that the original owner has made the best case for himself. Throwing around terms like "libel" and "exercise my right" is off-putting and makes it hard to empathize with him.