Even that would be clickbait though, because $219.5 billion isn’t the “original fine”, its the jury guidance. Its part of the sausage making of the justice system. The jury has a range of the fine per incident they can choose from to suggest a judgment. The judge then uses that jury guidance with additional info to determine the actual judgement. In this case $25 billion is the “original fine”.
You’re technically correct, but I still disagree with you on this. My reasoning is that I think the real story here is that meta has wormed its way out of being punished adequately, again.
This is where it becomes subjective. For some,Meta being “punished adequately” would mean the complete liquidation of the company and charges for executives in front of the International Criminal Court in the Hague for crimes against humanity.
A $25 billion award would be 41% of Meta’s annual profit. That is substantial!
No, I mean more like “Meta to pay just 10% of original fine” - So people get an idea of how their judiciary system really works.
Even that would be clickbait though, because $219.5 billion isn’t the “original fine”, its the jury guidance. Its part of the sausage making of the justice system. The jury has a range of the fine per incident they can choose from to suggest a judgment. The judge then uses that jury guidance with additional info to determine the actual judgement. In this case $25 billion is the “original fine”.
You’re technically correct, but I still disagree with you on this. My reasoning is that I think the real story here is that meta has wormed its way out of being punished adequately, again.
This is where it becomes subjective. For some,Meta being “punished adequately” would mean the complete liquidation of the company and charges for executives in front of the International Criminal Court in the Hague for crimes against humanity.
A $25 billion award would be 41% of Meta’s annual profit. That is substantial!
At least it’s not just a slap on the wrist, but I like the sound of the first paragraph!
“You’re correct but you weren’t negative enough so I disagree”