A small tool to view real-world ActivityPub objects as JSON! Enter a URL
or username from Mastodon or a similar service below, and we'll send a
request with
the right
Accept
header
to the server to view the underlying object.
{
"@context": [
"https://www.w3.org/ns/activitystreams",
{
"ostatus": "http://ostatus.org#",
"atomUri": "ostatus:atomUri",
"inReplyToAtomUri": "ostatus:inReplyToAtomUri",
"conversation": "ostatus:conversation",
"sensitive": "as:sensitive",
"toot": "http://joinmastodon.org/ns#",
"votersCount": "toot:votersCount",
"blurhash": "toot:blurhash",
"focalPoint": {
"@container": "@list",
"@id": "toot:focalPoint"
}
}
],
"id": "https://mastodon.social/users/ashleygjovik/statuses/114099638710247706",
"type": "Note",
"summary": null,
"inReplyTo": null,
"published": "2025-03-03T17:18:39Z",
"url": "https://mastodon.social/@ashleygjovik/114099638710247706",
"attributedTo": "https://mastodon.social/users/ashleygjovik",
"to": [
"https://www.w3.org/ns/activitystreams#Public"
],
"cc": [
"https://mastodon.social/users/ashleygjovik/followers"
],
"sensitive": false,
"atomUri": "https://mastodon.social/users/ashleygjovik/statuses/114099638710247706",
"inReplyToAtomUri": null,
"conversation": "tag:mastodon.social,2025-03-03:objectId=935951026:objectType=Conversation",
"content": "<p>🚨 Major Legal Victory in My Case Against Apple! 🚨 A federal court ruled that my retaliation & labor law claims will proceed — including whistleblower, workplace safety, crime victim retaliation claims, & penalties! 🔥 This sets major precedent for privacy & env whistleblowing!</p><p>Full announcement below & here: <a href=\"https://www.ashleygjovik.com/uploads/1/3/7/0/137008339/gjovik_v_apple_-_2025_03_03_update.pdf\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"nofollow noopener\" translate=\"no\"><span class=\"invisible\">https://www.</span><span class=\"ellipsis\">ashleygjovik.com/uploads/1/3/7</span><span class=\"invisible\">/0/137008339/gjovik_v_apple_-_2025_03_03_update.pdf</span></a></p><p>Decision here: <a href=\"https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.cand.417952/gov.uscourts.cand.417952.179.0.pdf\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"nofollow noopener\" translate=\"no\"><span class=\"invisible\">https://</span><span class=\"ellipsis\">storage.courtlistener.com/reca</span><span class=\"invisible\">p/gov.uscourts.cand.417952/gov.uscourts.cand.417952.179.0.pdf</span></a></p><p>Press here: <a href=\"https://news.bloomberglaw.com/litigation/apple-4\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"nofollow noopener\" translate=\"no\"><span class=\"invisible\">https://</span><span class=\"ellipsis\">news.bloomberglaw.com/litigati</span><span class=\"invisible\">on/apple-4</span></a></p>",
"contentMap": {
"en": "<p>🚨 Major Legal Victory in My Case Against Apple! 🚨 A federal court ruled that my retaliation & labor law claims will proceed — including whistleblower, workplace safety, crime victim retaliation claims, & penalties! 🔥 This sets major precedent for privacy & env whistleblowing!</p><p>Full announcement below & here: <a href=\"https://www.ashleygjovik.com/uploads/1/3/7/0/137008339/gjovik_v_apple_-_2025_03_03_update.pdf\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"nofollow noopener\" translate=\"no\"><span class=\"invisible\">https://www.</span><span class=\"ellipsis\">ashleygjovik.com/uploads/1/3/7</span><span class=\"invisible\">/0/137008339/gjovik_v_apple_-_2025_03_03_update.pdf</span></a></p><p>Decision here: <a href=\"https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.cand.417952/gov.uscourts.cand.417952.179.0.pdf\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"nofollow noopener\" translate=\"no\"><span class=\"invisible\">https://</span><span class=\"ellipsis\">storage.courtlistener.com/reca</span><span class=\"invisible\">p/gov.uscourts.cand.417952/gov.uscourts.cand.417952.179.0.pdf</span></a></p><p>Press here: <a href=\"https://news.bloomberglaw.com/litigation/apple-4\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"nofollow noopener\" translate=\"no\"><span class=\"invisible\">https://</span><span class=\"ellipsis\">news.bloomberglaw.com/litigati</span><span class=\"invisible\">on/apple-4</span></a></p>"
},
"attachment": [
{
"type": "Document",
"mediaType": "image/png",
"url": "https://files.mastodon.social/media_attachments/files/114/099/621/774/899/535/original/c1c025beff8eb5d9.png",
"name": "Re: Federal Court Allows Major Retaliation Claims Against Apple to Proceed;\nNLRB Charges Apple with Labor Violations for Suspending & Firing Me\nOn February 27, 2025, the U.S. District Court ruled that my retaliation and labor law claims\nwill move forward, rejecting Apple’s attempt to dismiss them. This decision represents a major step\ntoward holding Apple accountable for its retaliation, whistleblower suppression, and workplace\nsafety violations, and it sets an important precedent for corporate accountability, labor rights, and\nenvironmental justice. You can read the full court decision here. Bloomberg covered the\nruling: Read the article & I posted about it in a blog post.\nThe court ruled that Apple failed to dismiss my core claims (see my complaint), confirming\nthat my allegations are legally viable and must proceed toward trial. The decision also recognizes\nthe extraordinary nature of Apple’s retaliation, allowing me to seek penalties (special damages)\nfor labor violations, a rare ruling in an individual lawsuit. This means Apple could now face financial\nliability, beyond traditional damages, for violating labor laws",
"blurhash": "UCQ]+wt7%M%M~qRjRjWV_3WBRjWB?bWBRjay",
"focalPoint": [
0,
0
],
"width": 984,
"height": 1272
},
{
"type": "Document",
"mediaType": "image/png",
"url": "https://files.mastodon.social/media_attachments/files/114/099/622/853/041/238/original/076c99ac1a8ec387.png",
"name": "engaging in legally protected speech. The ruling ensures that Apple must answer for its efforts to\nsuppress workplace concerns and punish employees for exercising their rights.\nOne of the most significant aspects of the court ’s ruling is its decision to allow my California\nLabor Code § 1102.5 whistleblower retaliation claim to move forward with a privacy-based\nwhistleblower claim, something that is very rare. Courts often dismiss privacy-related retaliation\nclaims under § 1102.5 because they do not fit the traditional framework of whistleblower\ndisclosures. However, I successfully argued that Apple retaliated against me for opposing its illegal\nsurveillance, unethical medical experiments on employees, and unlawful AI-driven data collection\npractices. This is the first known case in which a § 1102.5 claim is based on protesting non -\nconsensual human research and AI-related privacy violations. I alleged that Apple was secretly\ncollecting employees' biometric and psychological data for AI development, engaging in deceptive\nhuman subject research, and violating medical ethics and California privacy laws. The court’s ruling\nconfirms that retaliation for exposing these practices qualifies as whistleblower retaliation under\n§ 1102.5, setting a groundbreaking precedent for AI ethics, privacy, and labor rights",
"blurhash": "U5Qcn{-;~q?b-;WBofof?bfQWBWB?bWBj[j[",
"focalPoint": [
0,
0
],
"width": 981,
"height": 1280
},
{
"type": "Document",
"mediaType": "image/png",
"url": "https://files.mastodon.social/media_attachments/files/114/099/623/582/582/554/original/d8c171bd31da2ed9.png",
"name": "values. Additionally, whistleblower retaliation claims under Labor Code § 1102.5 rarely proceed\non environmental law violations alone. However, the court ’s ruling in my case affirms\nthat employees who report environmental hazards, especially those that po se a risk to public\nhealth—are protected under both California’s general whistleblower statute and common law\nwrongful termination protections. This decision sets a critical precedent that corporations cannot\nretaliate against employees for exposing toxic pollution, illegal hazardous waste disposal, or other\nenvironmental crimes.\nThe court’s ruling allows me to seek a broad range of damages against Apple,\nincluding penalties, punitive damages, injunctive relief, compensatory damages, and declaratory\nrelief. Notably, the court approved penalties under California Labor Code §§ 1102.5 and 98.6,\nwhich is highly unusual in an individual lawsuit. Typically, only California’s Labor Commissioner or\nPAGA lawsuits seek statutory penalties, but I can now pursue them directly against Apple,\nincluding $10,000 per violation of whistleblower prote ctions and labor retaliation\nlaws. Additionally, the court upheld my right to seek punitive damages, which are reserved for\ncases involving malicious or reckless misconduct. Apple now faces significant financial liability\nb",
"blurhash": "U4QT4N-;_3~q~qkCRjWB?bkCRjWB?bofofWC",
"focalPoint": [
0,
0
],
"width": 961,
"height": 1254
},
{
"type": "Document",
"mediaType": "image/png",
"url": "https://files.mastodon.social/media_attachments/files/114/099/624/386/252/332/original/b24c5c6ded1cc6f4.png",
"name": "evidence, that my termination was unrelated to my whistleblowing. Additionally, California\nrecently amended Labor Code § 230(e) to make crime victim retaliation a standalone claim,\nreinforcing the legal significance of my precedent-setting case. These lega l developments,\ncombined with the court’s decision to allow my claims to proceed, make it much more difficult for\nApple to escape liability for its retaliation, workplace violations, and environmental misconduct.\nIn addition, the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) has formally charged Apple with\nviolating federal labor law over my 2021 suspension and termination. The NLRB’s complaint\nalleges that Apple unlawfully threatened me, placed me on leave, suspended me, and terminated\nmy employment in retaliation for protected speech and workplace organizing. In addition, based on\nmy October 2021 charges, the NLRB has also found that Apple maintains unlawful employment\npolicies restricting employee speech and organizing, which have broader implications for Apple’s\nworkforce. If the NLRB prevails, Apple could be ordered to reinstate me with back pay, rescind its\nunlawful policies, apologize to me, and take corrective action to prevent future retaliation. Read\nmore about the NLRB case here.\nThis case is about more than just Apple—it is about whether corporate ",
"blurhash": "U7QvwR%Mxu?bD%xut7jZ~qRjRjj[WBt7s:WV",
"focalPoint": [
0,
0
],
"width": 965,
"height": 1250
}
],
"tag": [],
"replies": {
"id": "https://mastodon.social/users/ashleygjovik/statuses/114099638710247706/replies",
"type": "Collection",
"first": {
"type": "CollectionPage",
"next": "https://mastodon.social/users/ashleygjovik/statuses/114099638710247706/replies?only_other_accounts=true&page=true",
"partOf": "https://mastodon.social/users/ashleygjovik/statuses/114099638710247706/replies",
"items": []
}
},
"likes": {
"id": "https://mastodon.social/users/ashleygjovik/statuses/114099638710247706/likes",
"type": "Collection",
"totalItems": 55
},
"shares": {
"id": "https://mastodon.social/users/ashleygjovik/statuses/114099638710247706/shares",
"type": "Collection",
"totalItems": 28
}
}