Again, no, and IMO the cited case (eBay v Craigslist founders) is again more of a counter example. From the court opinion: > Having chosen a for-profit corpora

Again, no, and IMO the cited case (eBay v Craigslist founders) is again more of a counter example. From the court opinion: > Having chosen a for-profit corporate form, the craigslist directors are bound by the fiduciary duties and standards that accompany that form. Those standards include acting to promote the value of the corporation for the benefit of its stockholders. "Value" yes, but again says nothing about "profit". The court acknowledged different stockholders can and do have different and even conflicting definitions for value, and that a contract (not a law) should be used to resolve those differences. In the end the only thing that the judge ruled against were actions specifically designed to destroy the value of the company's stock by making it harder to buy and sell. He didn't order e.g. that Craigslist raise ad prices even though it's widely believed they hold a ton of pricing power and are deliberately avoiding maximizing profit because they prioritize community.