Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Class-action suit filed against Meta for facilitating Rohingya Genocide [pdf]

edelson.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

61–70 of 164 posts

Re: Class-action suit filed against Meta for facilitating Rohingya Genocide [pdf]

#61

Post by pixelgeek »

sva_ wrote: post #19
zionic wrote: post #13

This reminds me of something I’ve been mulling over for a while. Should it be illegal for a media outlet to publish the untested claims of a lawsuit? I’ve seen this behavior all too often. “XYZ happened, person A did this, claims new suit”. You can sue over just about anything, and make whatever absurd claims you want. People see these headlines and believe as if they have been settled in court when this is almost ne…

I think news media outlets usually have to throw an "allegedly" in there somewhere. This is a direct link to the lawsuit though. The title was chosen by a user, presumably a private individual.

Or "claims are untested in court" is a common disclaimer in Canada

Re: Class-action suit filed against Meta for facilitating Rohingya Genocide [pdf]

#62

Post by john37386 »

joezydeco wrote: post #56
john37386 wrote: post #29

Can we trust this news? Who is edelson?

They're the firm that won the USD $650 million privacy suit against Facebook earlier this year. They....kind of have a track record when it comes to class action lawsuits.

Wow! $650B privacy law suit. Impressive! Are you sure about that number? It seems a bit high?

Re: Class-action suit filed against Meta for facilitating Rohingya Genocide [pdf]

#63

Post by iso1631 »

throw7 wrote: post #35

Reminds me of IBM and WW2. Maybe a class action suit should be drawn up for IBM also?

Like this one

https://www.nytimes.com/2001/02/11/world/lawsuit-says-ibm-ai...

And this one

https://edition.cnn.com/2004/LAW/07/08/ramasastry.holocaust....

Re: Class-action suit filed against Meta for facilitating Rohingya Genocide [pdf]

#64

Post by joezydeco »

john37386 wrote: post #62
joezydeco wrote: post #56

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They're the firm that won the USD $650 million privacy suit against Facebook earlier this year. They....kind of have a track record when it comes to class action lawsuits.

Wow! $650B privacy law suit. Impressive! Are you sure about that number? It seems a bit high?

Million. Fixed the reply.

Re: Class-action suit filed against Meta for facilitating Rohingya Genocide [pdf]

#65

Post by shadowgovt »

bikeshaving wrote: post #14

Between the UN fact-finding mission saying Facebook played a “determining role” in the genocide, the Bosworth memo, and the shit ton of access we now have thanks to the whistleblower, how is this not a strong case?

It's going to get into some very thick first-amendment weeds before section 230 protections are even introduced. Where do we draw the culpability line? Should Facebook have been legally obligated to ban those posts? If so, then if next week a failed coup attempt occurs in Burma to try and overthrow the military power that took control, should Facebook be held accountable for aiding and abetting the coup? We rapidly converge on a scenario where Facebook is culpable for existing, and then we may as well start shutting off forums in general.

With broad fringes, we generally draw the line at "no, the media isn't constrained from propagating a message; the responsibility rests on the speaker and the listener" in the US.

Not to say the suit has no merit. Merely that it faces a stiff headwind and a long uphill battle against a very laissez-faire freedom-of-information-flow precedent.

Re: Class-action suit filed against Meta for facilitating Rohingya Genocide [pdf]

#66

Post by iso1631 »

jimbob45 wrote: post #17

The British, EU, and US can get away with extorting FB/MS/Apple every few years because the loss of those markets would be greater than the extortion they're asking for (in the form of regulations). It's laughable that the small market Burmese think they can pull this garbage. Facebook doesn't need Myanmar and the Burmese government would best prepare for a second insurrection if they think their people would be okay…

You clearly have no idea who is filing this case or why. Start with a simple google search, or even just the wiki page

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rohingya_genocide

Re: Class-action suit filed against Meta for facilitating Rohingya Genocide [pdf]

#67

Post by 1cvmask »

Obama graced Aung San Suu Kyi despite her well known track record. Obama also at similar times embraced Narendra Modi, despite his known track record. Obama even removed the Modi sanctions and visa block that George W Bush put on him after his alleged role in the Gujarat Muslim massacre/genocide. Newspapers gloated about Obama's bromance with Modi.

Will they now sue Obama?

https://www.haaretz.com/world-news/asia-and-australia/how-au...

https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2016/9/14/obama-to-aung-san-s...

https://edition.cnn.com/2015/01/27/asia/india-obama-modi-loo...

Re: Class-action suit filed against Meta for facilitating Rohingya Genocide [pdf]

#68

Post by anders_p »

anshumankmr wrote: post #32
0des wrote: post #25

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The headline didn't mention facebook, did it?

Let's see https://www.cnbc.com/2021/10/28/facebook-changes-company-nam... https://www.nytimes.com/2021/10/28/technology/facebook-meta-... https://www.bbc.com/news/technology-59083601 Though you have a point, I know a lot of people who don't know that Alphabet is the parent of Google.

Seems like you completely missed the point of 0day's comments.

I can't think of any other explanation to why you'd use the word "Though" here.

Re: Class-action suit filed against Meta for facilitating Rohingya Genocide [pdf]

#69

Post by rhino369 »

ascagnel_ wrote: post #18
zionic wrote: post #13

This reminds me of something I’ve been mulling over for a while. Should it be illegal for a media outlet to publish the untested claims of a lawsuit? I’ve seen this behavior all too often. “XYZ happened, person A did this, claims new suit”. You can sue over just about anything, and make whatever absurd claims you want. People see these headlines and believe as if they have been settled in court when this is almost ne…

I think it's fine to report on the claims in a lawsuit once an initial hearing has taken place. If a judge reviews the claims and believes them to be reliable enough for the case to proceed, then it's enough to report as long as it's made clear that the claims are from a lawsuit that hasn't been fully tested in court.

The standard for surviving a motion to dismiss is really low in Federal Court. The court mostly assumes the factual allegations are true and then decides whether a claim could be made based on the law. So it's mostly a tool to weed out legally deficient law suits, but not factually wrong law suits.

The judge won't consider the actual evidence until the case progresses pretty far--the summary judgement stage. But even then, the judge only grants summary judgement if there is no genuine dispute as to any material fact.

Post reply on HN