4 ms·

Yeah, this issue has been pointed out many years ago, nice for the courts to finally catch up ! I'd also note that it's a company controlled by an USA competit

Yeah, this issue has been pointed out many years ago, nice for the courts to finally catch up ! I'd also note that it's a company controlled by an USA competitor (China) that gets hammered first (?) by an USA court. I wonder if USA platforms benefited from self-censorship by the courts ? See also how, while theoretically USA infocoms have been made illegal in the EU nearly a decade ago (with the US state violating human rights and these infocoms being forced to help them), that ban still hasn't been enforced, partially because the relationships between the USA and the EU has mostly still been pretty good - instead we have seen a bunch of other laws pop up in the EU and screws being tightened only slowly and meekly.

BlueTemplar 2y ago
Ah, why didn't I think of this ? https://forums.theregister.com/forum/all/2024/08/28/tiktok_blackout_challenge_appeal/#c_4920362 https://forums.theregister.com/forum/all/2024/08/28/tiktok_b... >> "...start nailing these fucking anti-social platforms to the wall...fined a tiny fraction of their income... but if this goes to a jury trial... the damages could result in hundreds of millions in compensation and punitive damages... then open the floodgates to more lawsuits." > This is why they "settle out of court" with strongly bound NDAs. The aggrieved party gets "quick justice" and the accused gets to say "who, me?, not guilty, no fault" and the merry-go-round continues. None of the incumbents ever want to go to court over these sorts of cases. Same applies to Ts&Cs. No one wants' them tested in a court. > They only ever seem to end up in court when Govt. wants a whipping boy or it's another $BigCorp with equally deep pockets and both see the advantage of "winning", or at least not losing.