3 ms·
>"It's not, not anymore than it already was." Maybe it already was fraud. I expect to see class-action lawsuits on the way soon.
by nickff 2y ago
>"It's not, not anymore than it already was."
Maybe it already was fraud. I expect to see class-action lawsuits on the way soon.
- TeMPOraL 2y agoIt wasn't. It perhaps should've been, but instead, it was just "legitimate marketing practice". This is another facet of a larger phenomenon, that I just commented on in another thread[0] - there's a lot of harmful activity that's considered legitimate, thus invisible to our legal and cultural immune systems, yet no less harmful than the slightly less legitimate scams. -- [0] - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=42401894 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=42401894
- nickff 2y agoYour linked post seems to be a polemic, not a legal analysis. Many advertisements are subject to successful (expensive) class-action lawsuits based on some fraud or truth-in-marketing claim. Also, this isn’t an advertisement, it’s a communication which takes place under an implied contract.
- account42 2y agoIf I take something from you and am never caught was it not theft?