51–60 of 166 posts
Political grandstanding by school board members eyeing higher offices is abhorrent.
No grandstanding in my opinion. Social media is a very dangerous and addictive drug that is difficult to police. It should be heavily regulated as it's destroying society.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> these social media companies are employing behavioral scientists Companies have employed behavioral scientists for at least a century now. Cigarette companies never got in trouble for hiring psychologists to devise their advertising (addiction triggers), but for the damage their products did. They could invent a new rule against exploiting human psychology but that does not have a precedent of illegality.
Cigarette companies were explicitly banned from advertising to children for this exact reason. I don’t think this is a good example, because if they’re comparable then social media should be banned from advertising to children also.
So the public schools will turn a profit from the increasingly depressed teens... and then what? Business as usual with some bonus cash for counseling services? What's the real goal here? Precedent? I don't see the (non-monetary) benefit unless there are new laws introduced that severely restrict how social media is allowed to operate or outright ban various addictive techniques employed by their platforms (which wil…
Precedent is a big one, but it is also possible that the court could order these companies to take specific steps to redress this harm.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
.. it’s been a clearly focused project for over 4 years now. A colleague is on the board..A bevy of mental health experts are core to this - so due diligence. I don’t know the layout of the legal team, but was told they have put this thru the ringer - the goal has always been a legal precedent, then actual legislation, then adoption by other entities as well. The Portland School District has a parallel lawsuit as wel…
Is there a specific law that these firms are supposed to have violated? (Does there need to be? I am not a lawyer.) Does the school district have standing to sue on behalf of the students? (Is the injury that they pay more for mental health services for students?) I’m genuinely curious. There’s a surface analogy to the cases against opioid manufacturers and distributors, but those are controlled substances whereas Yo…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Cigarette companies were explicitly banned from advertising to children for this exact reason. I don’t think this is a good example, because if they’re comparable then social media should be banned from advertising to children also.
If hiring psychologists was why they were banned from advertising to children, why can Mattel advertise to children?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
.. it’s been a clearly focused project for over 4 years now. A colleague is on the board..A bevy of mental health experts are core to this - so due diligence. I don’t know the layout of the legal team, but was told they have put this thru the ringer - the goal has always been a legal precedent, then actual legislation, then adoption by other entities as well. The Portland School District has a parallel lawsuit as wel…
Is there a specific law that these firms are supposed to have violated? (Does there need to be? I am not a lawyer.) Does the school district have standing to sue on behalf of the students? (Is the injury that they pay more for mental health services for students?) I’m genuinely curious. There’s a surface analogy to the cases against opioid manufacturers and distributors, but those are controlled substances whereas Yo…
(Honest question, I don't understand how the law applies globally to the internet) Given that TikTock is Chinese, what happens if they lose a court case in the US? How can anyone force them to pay up or change their ways? I assume the only outcome is either "pay up" or be banned in that jurisdiction? (Assuming they lose) I can't help thinking this is like the all the three letter US agencies trying to force US law on…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
They have standing because its a statutory tort and because and to the extent thar they allege the kind of action and injury that the statute makes compensable. You seem to be imaging the kind of analysis done for a suit that is not based on a statute providing liability, but on a conflict of laws trying to negate or enjoin a government action for violating a controlling law that does not provide a explicit right of…
Their alleged standing is predicated on a single count of violating the Washington Public Nuisance Law, RCW 7.48.010 (see page 86 of their complaint[1])[2]. So their torturous logic is that somehow not only are the defendants' services addictive, but that the addiction thereof spurs students to engage in violent and/or disruptive behaviors that interferes with the enjoyment of school property and the safety of its em…
That's not the problem, and that would be a poorly targeted and illegal solution if it were. You can't expel a child from public school for having a mental health problem.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
If hiring psychologists was why they were banned from advertising to children, why can Mattel advertise to children?
For the reason that their products are harmful , not that they had hired psychologists.
This lawsuit is an embarrassment using a compilation of anti social media arguments including misleading ones where the truth is twisted to make an argument. >Meta also delays the time it takes to load the feed. “This is because without that three-second delay, Instagram wouldn’t feel variable.” This isn't a fact. They are literally quoting speculation from Vice while making it seem like an official quote from Meta.…