Originally published at: https://boingboing.net/2019/11/27/judge-says-facebook-users-enti.html
…
1 Like
The pop-in, pop-over, autoplay ads are making the site incredibly unpleasant to use.
6 Likes
Too bad they only understand $ damages. “Better security” is a vague, ethereal, and mysterious thing to them.
3 Likes
In a decision released late Tuesday night, a federal judge ruled that up to 29 million Facebook users whose personal info was stolen in a September 2018 data breach are not entitled to sue Facebook as a group for damages – but the users may be entitled to demand better personal data security at Facebook.
“You are entitled to whine impotently, but not actually inconvenience your betters.”
He’s angling for a job on the Supreme Court. All he needs to do now is rape someone.
3 Likes
Users were allowed to sue as a group to require Facebook to employ automated security monitoring, improve employee training, and educate people better about hacking threats.
And if they don’t comply, what happens? Nothing? A fine that amounts to pocket change for them?
1 Like
Are the lawyers managing the class allowed to sue for legal fees?
1 Like
U.S. District Judge William Alsup said neither credit monitoring costs nor the reduced value of stolen personal information was a “cognizable injury” that supported a class action for damages.
This is the same blind spot in American jurisprudence that’s making it so difficult to put together an anti-trust case against Facebook. The system can’t see any injury beyond monetary value.
1 Like
What he means is, “I’m too old, stupid and lazy to ‘cognize’ all this techno cyber jibber jabber.”
Don’t forget that this is the same country that cheerfully calculates millions in “emotional damages”.
1 Like
This topic was automatically closed after 5 days. New replies are no longer allowed.
