this post was submitted on 21 Nov 2025
178 points (99.4% liked)
Technology
77925 readers
2223 users here now
This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.
Our Rules
- Follow the lemmy.world rules.
- Only tech related news or articles.
- Be excellent to each other!
- Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
- Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
- Politics threads may be removed.
- No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
- Only approved bots from the list below, this includes using AI responses and summaries. To ask if your bot can be added please contact a mod.
- Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
- Accounts 7 days and younger will have their posts automatically removed.
Approved Bots
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
I love to see Meta lose, but I couldn't care less that "legacy media" lost ad revenue. This money should be paid to the public for being targeted with illegal privacy practices.
So the public should sue them. This is not the court deciding where the money should go. Media companies sued for their share, the public can sue to get their.
If you sue and lose it could cost up to a million dollars in your own legal fees and having to pay theirs. The "justice" system is designed for the rich.
So what are you proposing?
I don't have a solution but more transparency for starters. If I put money on the line I want to make sure the judge isn't corrupt.
"Publicity is the very soul of justice. It is the keenest spur to exertion, and the surest of all guards against improbity. It keeps the judge himself, while trying, under trial"
— Jeremy Bentham, 1748-1832, English Jurist & Philosopher.
My friend just had a $100k decision against him and looking at a further $500k in legal fees for the other side while having paid $600 of his own fees.
The judge lied in the published decision that my friend already pleaded guilty to a crime from a recent previous hearing and was convicted. However the police had dropped the prosecution of that case because there was no evidence.
Despite that obvious bias going into the decision I don't know if any lawyer will appeal on that basis because of the career repercussions of calling out a judge.
It would help if he could publish online the previous case which was dismissed but he would risk contempt of court for continuing to talk about the matter (a defamation case).
There were plenty of other dodgy things like the other party committing perjury, being caught out lying yet the judge not caring.
This other party is not "rich" but connected to powerful people.