4 ms·

Mark Zuckerberg risks jail if Facebook fails to comply with online safety law

ncmncm 5y ago
I never understood why Microsoft executives were not jailed for contempt of court when the videos they produced as evidence, in the anti-trust trial, turned out to be wholly fabricated.
LinuxBender 5y ago
Does the bill give powers to easily seize the domain of the offending organization? One reason I ask is that a company might flirt with the risk having an executive locked up but they most certainly will not risk the potential revenue loss of their domain being parked on a static government page. A company can throw a new CEO under the bus any time. The board might even use that as a passive aggressive tool to dump their CEO. There will always be a person eager and available to fill the role.
- smt88 5y ago
  They would need cooperation from ICANN and likely US law enforcement. Most of the original top-level domains are essentially under US control.
  - LinuxBender 5y ago
    That is my understanding as well. One reason I ask is that such laws would require cooperation between governments and agreements ahead of times around processes and procedures. I am curious if such agreements exist and to what extent such processes are in place.
    - chmod775 5y ago
      You give legislators too much credit. Laws are written all the time without thought about enforceability.
      - vba616 5y ago
        Something I've not heard anything about from an authoritative source - in the US, I've noticed laws being written with a preface that makes a political statement about what the law is, does, and why, and it is not at all consistent with the rest of it, which defines terms carefully. It seems to be a trick to send a chosen message to the media without having any effect on the court system. So I wonder if that could account for the "unenforceability" of some laws - basically what the law is reported as being, is just a fiction for the public, so the courts don't even engage with it.
      - LinuxBender 5y ago
        I think you're right. This may be political posturing to appease someone.
- vlovich123 5y ago
  Zuck isn’t just a regular CEO. He also has majority voting control of the company due to having irrevocable proxy voting rights on Moscovitz’s and Parker’s shares. He is, for all intents and purposes, Facebook/Meta, and it seems unlikely he’d throw himself under the bus.
  - LinuxBender 5y ago
    That's a good point. I am curious if have been any cases where a majority shareholder has been locked up and run their business from prison.
bener 5y ago
Seems to me this would be about as unlikely as Facebook following through with their threat to pull out of the EU.
- foxyv 5y ago
  I can see the headlines: "Facebook leaves Europe. Continent wide holiday declared."

I never understood why Microsoft executives were not jailed for contempt of court when the videos they produced as evidence, in the anti-trust trial, turned out to be wholly fabricated.

LinuxBender 5y ago

Does the bill give powers to easily seize the domain of the offending organization? One reason I ask is that a company might flirt with the risk having an executive locked up but they most certainly will not risk the potential revenue loss of their domain being parked on a static government page. A company can throw a new CEO under the bus any time. The board might even use that as a passive aggressive tool to dump their CEO. There will always be a person eager and available to fill the role.

smt88 5y ago
They would need cooperation from ICANN and likely US law enforcement. Most of the original top-level domains are essentially under US control.
- LinuxBender 5y ago
  That is my understanding as well. One reason I ask is that such laws would require cooperation between governments and agreements ahead of times around processes and procedures. I am curious if such agreements exist and to what extent such processes are in place.
  - chmod775 5y ago
    You give legislators too much credit. Laws are written all the time without thought about enforceability.
    - vba616 5y ago
      Something I've not heard anything about from an authoritative source - in the US, I've noticed laws being written with a preface that makes a political statement about what the law is, does, and why, and it is not at all consistent with the rest of it, which defines terms carefully. It seems to be a trick to send a chosen message to the media without having any effect on the court system. So I wonder if that could account for the "unenforceability" of some laws - basically what the law is reported as being, is just a fiction for the public, so the courts don't even engage with it.
    - LinuxBender 5y ago
      I think you're right. This may be political posturing to appease someone.
vlovich123 5y ago
Zuck isn’t just a regular CEO. He also has majority voting control of the company due to having irrevocable proxy voting rights on Moscovitz’s and Parker’s shares. He is, for all intents and purposes, Facebook/Meta, and it seems unlikely he’d throw himself under the bus.
- LinuxBender 5y ago
  That's a good point. I am curious if have been any cases where a majority shareholder has been locked up and run their business from prison.

bener 5y ago

Seems to me this would be about as unlikely as Facebook following through with their threat to pull out of the EU.

foxyv 5y ago
I can see the headlines: "Facebook leaves Europe. Continent wide holiday declared."