3 ms·
If harming kids does not move the justice system to set precedence, I don’t understand what else will. Meta settled without admitting wrongdoing, so basically t
by bicepjai 1mo ago
If harming kids does not move the justice system to set precedence, I don’t understand what else will. Meta settled without admitting wrongdoing, so basically the next company facing the same claims has nothing binding it other than I have spare 1.7 billion/year for the next 10 years.
The payment is $16.7 billion spread over ten years against $60 billion in annual profit. The states had estimated a realistic verdict at around $200 billion. They took 8% of that. Settling is sometimes the right call. I’d still want to know why they thought this was the moment to take the deal.
- mrandish 1mo ago> $16.7 billion spread over ten years against $60 billion in annual profit. Just 2.6% of profit or less than 0.8% of revenue. Seems like FB got the deal of the century since any judgement would have real restrictions and enforcement with teeth. Since this is just a consent decree, FB can now start the 'malicious compliance' game where they incrementally erode, reinterpret and route around any deal terms they don't like. The DA's position is now substantially weaker because they'll have to go back to court to stop FB's inevitable backsliding. > I’d still want to know why they thought this was the moment to take the deal. Ultimately, this is about politics and money. By taking a lousy deal the DAs got their headlines and payoff now and can claim a 'victory' before the next election cycle. The alternative is even after the DAs won this ruling, FB would certainly drag out the inevitable appeals because ~$200B tanks the stock, while 0.8% of rev is just a cost of business. By the time all appeals were done none of these DAs would even be in office. Neither the headlines nor cash would do them any good.