← Back to context Comment by close04 9 months ago Their point is that they are not. 4 comments close04 Reply arboles 9 months ago It would set the precedent for everyone. The real difference is that they can beg the question and people like Aaron Schwartz couldn't. Mindwipe 9 months ago Aaron Schwartz's lawyer could have posed exactly the same claim.It wouldn't have succeeded, just like this won't.Lawyers will deploy any possible argument, just in case, even if it has a 0.1% chance of working because why wouldn't you? arboles 9 months ago On the off chance the defense succeeds I'm proven right, if the defense fails, I'm still proven right as the fine will only be a minor set back for Meta. goodpoint 9 months ago No, this is a case of "rules for thee but not for me".
arboles 9 months ago It would set the precedent for everyone. The real difference is that they can beg the question and people like Aaron Schwartz couldn't. Mindwipe 9 months ago Aaron Schwartz's lawyer could have posed exactly the same claim.It wouldn't have succeeded, just like this won't.Lawyers will deploy any possible argument, just in case, even if it has a 0.1% chance of working because why wouldn't you? arboles 9 months ago On the off chance the defense succeeds I'm proven right, if the defense fails, I'm still proven right as the fine will only be a minor set back for Meta. goodpoint 9 months ago No, this is a case of "rules for thee but not for me".
Mindwipe 9 months ago Aaron Schwartz's lawyer could have posed exactly the same claim.It wouldn't have succeeded, just like this won't.Lawyers will deploy any possible argument, just in case, even if it has a 0.1% chance of working because why wouldn't you? arboles 9 months ago On the off chance the defense succeeds I'm proven right, if the defense fails, I'm still proven right as the fine will only be a minor set back for Meta.
arboles 9 months ago On the off chance the defense succeeds I'm proven right, if the defense fails, I'm still proven right as the fine will only be a minor set back for Meta.
It would set the precedent for everyone. The real difference is that they can beg the question and people like Aaron Schwartz couldn't.
Aaron Schwartz's lawyer could have posed exactly the same claim.
It wouldn't have succeeded, just like this won't.
Lawyers will deploy any possible argument, just in case, even if it has a 0.1% chance of working because why wouldn't you?
On the off chance the defense succeeds I'm proven right, if the defense fails, I'm still proven right as the fine will only be a minor set back for Meta.
No, this is a case of "rules for thee but not for me".