Comment on Google pays $68M to settle claims its voice assistant spied on users

MolochHorridus@lemmy.ml ⁨13⁩ ⁨hours⁩ ago

• XLE@piefed.social ⁨13⁩ ⁨hours⁩ ago

  They should be a de jure admission of guilt, is what they should be

  source
• nil@piefed.ca ⁨11⁩ ⁨hours⁩ ago

  Yeah, why settle? They should stop spying on us and we all know that.

  source
• frongt@lemmy.zip ⁨10⁩ ⁨hours⁩ ago

  You’d rather have them drag it out in court until the person can’t afford to fight the case?

  source

  • unconfirmedsourcesDOTgov@lemmy.sdf.org ⁨6⁩ ⁨hours⁩ ago

    I think we would all prefer if the US would stop pretending the 6th amendment didn’t exist and if trials could be carried out without endless delays.

    source

    • frongt@lemmy.zip ⁨5⁩ ⁨hours⁩ ago

      The sixth amendment is for criminal cases.

      source
• SculptusPoe@lemmy.world ⁨13⁩ ⁨hours⁩ ago

  Settlements only happen with the consent of both parties. I don’t see that as a problem. If you really don’t want a settlement, then opt out of the class action and bring your own case.

  source

  • SynonymousStoat@lemmy.world ⁨5⁩ ⁨hours⁩ ago

    As far as I’m aware the lawyers didn’t consult with the clasa-action members, or at the very least I was never asked if we should accept the settlement or not, the lawyers just accepted. Alternatively you could opt out of the settlement if you wanted, which is what I chose to do.

    source
  • idealism_nearby@lemmy.world ⁨11⁩ ⁨hours⁩ ago

    I don’t think it should be acceptable to buy your way out of a court case which reveals truth and justice.

    source

    • waterSticksToMyBalls@lemmy.world ⁨11⁩ ⁨hours⁩ ago

      But are you sure you don’t want to opt out and go 1v1 vs a trillion dollar company???

      source

      • angelmountain@feddit.nl ⁨11⁩ ⁨hours⁩ ago

        It is kinda problematic that it matters how deep pockets of both parties are in court, isn’t it?

        source
    • SculptusPoe@lemmy.world ⁨11⁩ ⁨hours⁩ ago

      Well, they can’t in the case of a criminal case. These are civil cases, buying your way out is all that happens in the best of circumstances in a civil case. It is just a matter of how much you have to pay to buy out. Punitive damages might do some extra justice, but what would that be? In the end you have to imagine that some radom person has sued you unjustly and decide how you want an innocent person to be treated, or perhaps they sued you with some small real point to their lawsuit, do you want the default to be that you are ruined. Maybe you didn’t intend harm, but want to either make ammends or at least get past the lawsuit so you can get on with your life, do you want no recourse possible?

      In the end, if Google was forced out of business, many(most) of us would be way worse off. That is not the ideal outcome. Ideally, the case brings enough money to the plaintiff to right any hardship caused and, in the case of punitive damages, does just enough hardship to the defendant that they are dissuaded from pursuing that course of action, but you aren’t trying to kill them.

      source
    • nooneescapesthelaw@mander.xyz ⁨9⁩ ⁨hours⁩ ago

      That’s the entire point of a civil case, money exchanging to pay for damages. If the plaintiffs are happy then fuck it, they wanted money and now they have it

      source
• artyom@piefed.social ⁨11⁩ ⁨hours⁩ ago

  And how do you think the claimants would feel about that? If we had a functioning justice system we wouldn’t have to.

  source