One that stood out for me is complete immunity for for the execs for "known" and "unknown" violations:
"Mark Zuckerberg, Sheryl Sandberg, and other executives get blanket immunity for their role in the violations. This is wrong and sets a terrible precedent. The law doesn’t give them a special exemption. The settlement fine print gives Facebook broad immunity for “known” and “unknown” violations. What’s covered by these immunity deals? Facebook knows, but the public is kept in the dark."
Chopra disagreed with the decision not to charge the `bergs and noted that in the Cambridge Analytica case the former CEO was charged.
Slaughter believes that there was sufficient evidence to name Zuckerberg in a lawsuit.
It is possible that Facebook fears Mark Zuckerberg being subjected to court-ordered discovery and put under oath. He came very close in a shareholder lawsuit some years ago and Facebook settled on the day before he was to testify.
Law enforcement leverages social media in a major way. They have customized software that interfaces with all the major environments and ties them all together.
It makes their jobs (LEO) much easier. They are not going to shit where they eat.
That's exactly the violations I figured they were getting immunity from. I mean, let's be real, they're not going to undo any of that, and they likely want to make sure that any new social nets set up the same facilities for them.
https://twitter.com/chopraftc/status/1154010756079390720
One that stood out for me is complete immunity for for the execs for "known" and "unknown" violations:
"Mark Zuckerberg, Sheryl Sandberg, and other executives get blanket immunity for their role in the violations. This is wrong and sets a terrible precedent. The law doesn’t give them a special exemption. The settlement fine print gives Facebook broad immunity for “known” and “unknown” violations. What’s covered by these immunity deals? Facebook knows, but the public is kept in the dark."