So agreeing with me I have pretty much every judgement the courts have ever made on cases such as these (I'm giving myself some wiggle room but I'm unaware of any that go the other way on these issues) and numerous articles by legal experts on the matter. Disagreeing we me are two musicians who stand to make a tidy profit simply by bringing the case regardless of whether it has any chance of standing on its merits.
Ah. Appreciate the personal shot.
It's not a personal shot as in "haha, you're really stupid". It's a comment about the fact that you did
get hoodwinked, I suspect because you didn't put any effort into double checking the story before sharing it. If you had you'd have gone to the source that Edgemedia linked to and seen it was nbc.com.co you may have recalled that site from when it broke the "news" there was going to be a sixth season of Breaking Bad or that a pastor from Virginia (also called Paul Horner...) was sentenced to a year in prison for refusing to marry gay couples, both of which were almost immediately debunked. Even if you weren't aware of nbc.com.co's history if you went onto the site itself you'd almost immediately see that one of its main stories was that Donald Trump had gone on Fox News and accepted a challenge from National Council of La Raza to fight a bear in Mexico. If that hadn't been enough of a giveaway you might have decided to google Paul Horner Harvard Law and found that there's no professor by that name (which can in turn be verified by searching on Harvard Law's website pretty quickly) and that pretty much all references to a Paul Horner come from either nbc.com.co or another fake news site NationalReport.net (as mentioned above).
Websites such as this work in a pretty simple way. They invent stories that relate to topical news items, some more ridiculous than others, and wait for slightly more legitimate websites to become aware of them (frequently tripped up by the official looking NBC name) and share them without fat checking (because in online media these days it's more important to be first then it is to be right) as Edgemedia did. They then wait for people to read those other sites, not do any checking and then share the story themselves (as you did) so they can rake in the ad revenue from people going to the website to see the original story. Pretty much any level of research by either Edgemedia or you would have revealed the story is fake and pretty clearly fake... but in a world where people don't do that it's been highly effective for that site and its ilk.