Great article Rene. At this point I do think the judicial system is compromised. Why are so many judges siding with BS tech lawyers and their BS arguments? Could it be that these tech firms are bribing circuit and federal district judges, especially in California?
That could be so as well. But I've noticed a pattern - for example, the courts have been siding with tech companies regarding no liability for tech firms for any harms caused by 3rd party users using those websites - called Section 230. This law has been unchanged since 1996 but the California courts seemingly willingly refuse to interpret it correctly (which WOULD impute liability to tech firms if they did read it correctly), absolving tech firms of all liability and allowing tech firms to maximize profits. Just a dangerous pattern of the US judiciary siding with tech firms nearly all the time and just rubber stamping tech lawyers' BS arguments.
Great article Rene. At this point I do think the judicial system is compromised. Why are so many judges siding with BS tech lawyers and their BS arguments? Could it be that these tech firms are bribing circuit and federal district judges, especially in California?
either that or they are so deeply brainwashed from their tech friendly environment that they actually believe these arguments.
That could be so as well. But I've noticed a pattern - for example, the courts have been siding with tech companies regarding no liability for tech firms for any harms caused by 3rd party users using those websites - called Section 230. This law has been unchanged since 1996 but the California courts seemingly willingly refuse to interpret it correctly (which WOULD impute liability to tech firms if they did read it correctly), absolving tech firms of all liability and allowing tech firms to maximize profits. Just a dangerous pattern of the US judiciary siding with tech firms nearly all the time and just rubber stamping tech lawyers' BS arguments.