The judge should have ordered Meta to place a banner on FB so that everyone can see it and join if they're a victim.

Wow this is a really good idea. I wonder if the various state trials happening as well should use this for remediation too.

It's not a hard thing to implement on their end and should be mandated by a judge as you said.

Filing this away for later use.

▲

miki123211 5 hours ago | parent [-]

Europe (Poland) loves this kind of stuff.

It often comes up in (anti) free-speech trials, where the government compels the perpetrator to issue a public apology to the victim. Forcing them to buy an ad in a newspaper for example is not unheard of.

As far as I understand, Americans consider this to be "compelled speech" and hence prohibited, but I might be wrong on this.

	▲	singleshot_ 18 minutes ago \| parent \| next [-]
		Get it in a consent decree
	▲	dcrazy 5 hours ago \| parent \| prev [-]
		The same thing happens here. Courts are allowed to compel speech as a method of remedy, but my recollection is that this is sometimes successfully challenged. An interesting variant I’ve seen on anti-smoking banners at convenience stores is “A federal court has ordered a Philip Morris USA to say: …”

▲

smsm42 6 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

Not likely to survive 1st Amendment challenge - it is possible to compel somebody to certain speech as a result of losing a case, but doing this as a prerequisite when the case has just started is not likely to fly. Otherwise I could force Facebook (or any other platform) to publish anything just by suing them - and anybody could sue anybody else on virtually any grounds.

	▲	gowld 3 hours ago \| parent [-]
		https://about.fb.com/news/2025/01/meta-more-speech-fewer-mis... "We will allow more speech by lifting restrictions on some topics that are part of mainstream discourse and focusing our enforcement on illegal and high-severity violations."