News for hackers. Stuff that matters.

A comment on Judge rules Facebook parent Meta intentionally violated campaign finance laws. Parent comment

Re:Judge rules Facebook parent Meta intentionally violated c... by JumpCrisscross on Tuesday September 06, 2022 @02:58PM (#32741591)
> If they had simply not complied at all and tried to blame their customers for not classifying the ads correctly, it might have gone a bit better in their favor

This would have been blatant contempt of court. What they did was slightly less blatant.

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Judge rules Facebook parent Meta intentionally violated c... by pc86 on Tuesday September 06, 2022 @03:23PM (#32741980)
How so?
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Judge rules Facebook parent Meta intentionally violated c... by JumpCrisscross on Tuesday September 06, 2022 @03:27PM (#32742042)
> How so?

Facebook and Washington "entered into a stipulated judgment that covered Meta’s violations through November 30, 2018" in 2018 [1]. (It required Facebook "no longer 'accept ads that relate to Washington’s state or local elected officials, candidates, elections or ballot initiatives.'")

Not complying at all with requests from the AG, i.e. arguing they had no knowledge about the situation (versus that they misunderstood the rules), could thus be interpreted as willful violation of the judgement.

[1] https://agportal-s3bucket.s3.amazonaws.com/174_StatesMSJ.PDF page 3

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Judge rules Facebook parent Meta intentionally violated c... by morelisp on Tuesday September 06, 2022 @03:18PM (#32741912)
> contempt of court

what

[ Parent | on HN ]