I don't think it's a stretch to see a systemic pattern of big tech avoiding consequences that leave the rest of us in the power of monopolies.

Regardless of the content of this ruling, it's another brick in the wall.

▲

strictnein 2 hours ago | parent [-]

A separate discussion for sure, but simply seeing a headline and declaring it an "incredible miscarriage of justice" seems a little far fetched.

For example, many times the courts will point out that the laws need to be updated, which would be in the ruling. Or that a law as written is unconstitutional but it could be made so with some changes. That stuff doesn't make the headlines though, just the "Courts rules for/against X". Ideally we'd have a legislative branch that would look at these rulings and update our laws, but their disinterest in doing so isn't the courts' fault.

▲

webdood90 2 hours ago | parent [-]

Again I ask, why do people stan for billionaires and corporations? Who are you helping here?

▲

mpalczewski an hour ago | parent [-]

A legitimately rule based legal system is far more beneficial than one that takes sides based on the taste of the day. beneficial for everyone involved. If you want to write "Stan for billionaires", without any sort of reasoning, well, that says more about you.

	▲	webdood90 14 minutes ago \| parent [-]
		The system should serve the people, not a small minority of concentrated players. If you can't see how the system is manipulated in their favor, you are part of the problem.