This is probably not up to the legal standard, but I suspect you know that. There are valid reasons to not support big tech, but is this case really one that you want to advocate?
I don't have anything in particular against 'big tech', but this (Facebook) case does seem like an example of (enabling) libel via willful blindness to me. I also think Yelp and other sites are close to, or past that line as well (in how they enable extortion of many small businesses by fraudulent 'reviews').
Merriam-Webster defines "Willful Blindness" as:
>"deliberate failure to make a reasonable inquiry of wrongdoing (as drug dealing in one's house) despite suspicion or an awareness of the high probability of its existence"
Am I missing something (IANAL), or is that case about copyright infringement?
I guess we'll find out whether or not this case against FB will move forward, but I'd be willing to put down a wager that FB will prevail. Are you equally confident in your position?
That case was indeed about copyright infringement, but:
>"Courts have held that defendants cannot escape the reach of these statutes by deliberately shielding themselves, from clear evidence of critical facts that are strongly suggested by the circumstances, understanding that those who behave in such manner should be treated as those who had actual knowledge.
I will bet on anything, but only at odds which result in a positive expected outcome. The question is what terms and odds you're giving.
