James Damore et al v. Google LLC (2017) -

[altkiwi01]

but don't have the balls to just pass a tax so they make up some imaginary violation.

Exactly, the reason they gave was pure BS. The funny thing is that aosp is perfectly free to use and available to install whatever store, browser or whatever you want. Infact, I'm pretty sure aosp already comes with its own browser, and even if the phone manufacture signs up to Google Play services, the user can just uninstall/install whatever they want.

On the whole "internal Google drama" thing, bloomberg reported the other day on that Fuchsia project (android/chrome os replacement) . Apparently the internal drama machine has been spinning, with the ad team winning out against the security team on a few things. Who knows what that really means (its not at all unusual in software engineering for marketing/sales/advertising to win out against the engineering teams), Fuchsia could easily be more privacy focused than Android. However, with all of these power struggles, who knows whats going on over there? Can they pull together enough to make things work? And with a company that politicized, are we going to see software that does sneaky things to police wrong thought?

 

[Pope Negro Joe the XIIIth]

The EU is just pissy that they don't have exclusive control over information. They're micromanaging assholes, but them targeting google makes it incredibly difficult deciding who to root for?

This. One of the choice quotes from the February Facebook hearings in the UK:

This is the problem: You have all this information. We have none of it, because you won’t show it to us.

https://qz.com/1202593/uk-lawmakers-brutally-bashed-facebook-in-a-hearing-on-fake-news-on-us-soil/

 

[soy_king]

I cheer for the fight itself. I hope that it vanquishes both contestants.

Sadly, I don't think that's the case. I feel that it's more likely Google will eventually bend the knee in order to retain access to EU markets, and more worryingly, will probably do so in China to get access to their market.

IMO it's just a pure cash grab. They see a huge pile of money and want to steal some of it but don't have the balls to just pass a tax so they make up some imaginary violation.

It's probably a bit of both.

 

[TowinKarz]

IMO it's just a pure cash grab. They see a huge pile of money and want to steal some of it but don't have the balls to just pass a tax so they make up some imaginary violation.

Fining a big business for "market based human rights violations" is always more palatable to an electorate anyway, if your goal is to look like you give a fuck what happens to the plebs.

 

[eldri]

Saw this when viewing a shared Google doc...


Google secretly bigoted

 

[mindlessobserver]

So looking into the progress of the lawsuit, the basic summary is Google has successfully convinced the judge to seal the entire thing and put gag orders on all the participants. So we won't even get to know if it has progressed to the discovery phase as all progress is now no longer a matter of record, and anything that is found in discovery will likewise be sealed.

This is sadly all too common, and Google is arguing for it cuz they fear economic damages as consequence of "unproven" litigation. As the defendant, they have the right to argue for this since they have not been found liable for any criminal activity (yet). I would like to say we should not argue that a defendant exercising their rights does not admit guilt but this is Google and not a person. What are they afraid of the public learning?

Curious to see what Trumps recent interest in their shenanigans will mean for this case.

 

[AnOminous]

So looking into the progress of the lawsuit, the basic summary is Google has successfully convinced the judge to seal the entire thing and put gag orders on all the participants. So we won't even get to know if it has progressed to the discovery phase as all progress is now no longer a matter of record, and anything that is found in discovery will likewise be sealed.

This is sadly all too common, and Google is arguing for it cuz they fear economic damages as consequence of "unproven" litigation. As the defendant, they have the right to argue for this since they have not been found liable for any criminal activity (yet). I would like to say we should not argue that a defendant exercising their rights does not admit guilt but this is Google and not a person. What are they afraid of the public learning?

Curious to see what Trumps recent interest in their shenanigans will mean for this case.

It's the standard bullshit where anyone richer than God gets special rights in special secret courts the public aren't allowed to know about.

 

[CrunkLord420]

I can't get excited about any of this, I'm completely prepared for Google to get out of this without anything but asspats from progressive journalists.

Will we get anything after the fact?

 

[mindlessobserver]

Stiff upper lip. The fact that there is no settlement announced means Damore didn't take a settlement. Standard corporate practice for shit like this is to throw lunch money at the problem in exchange for a permanent gag order, non disclosure agreement and injunction to pursue no further litigation. Damores autism and that Brahmin caste Sikh warrior lady who is his lawyer seems intent on blood rather then money.

I am cautiously optimistic. Sad that I don't get to see what is going on. Google is probably burying the case in motions though, and this is County court, not Federal. So the clerks and judges who are used to dealing with drunk drivers and drug dealers are having to deal with a shit fest of national level significance. The judge assigned to this is in way over his head, since he is an entry level rube who wants promotion, and is scared shitless of judges far more senior and powerful using his name as a punching bag. So he wants this case to go away as much as Google does.

Eventually a jury will have to be empaneled though, and then we will get some info.

 

[AnOminous]

I am cautiously optimistic. Sad that I don't get to see what is going on. Google is probably burying the case in motions though, and this is County court, not Federal. So the clerks and judges who are used to dealing with drunk drivers and drug dealers are having to deal with a shit fest of national level significance.

Not really. This is Santa Clara County, home of lots of corporate litigation. This isn't their first rodeo and isn't likely their first case involving Google. Dhillon wouldn't file this in a court too dumb to understand the case.

Incidentally, the same day the Complaint and First Amended Complaint were sealed (long after the complaint itself had been put online), the case was deemed "complex" and is going to be before a judge competent to hear such cases.

There are 77 judges in Santa Clara Superior Court.

The judge is Presiding Judge Brian C. Walsh, i.e. the guy who is the boss of all those other judges.

 

[mindlessobserver]

The judge is Presiding Judge Brian C. Walsh, i.e. the guy who is the boss of all those other judges.

Well that is a relief. Was having visions of judge Roy Bean being handed this mess. Glad they are taking it serious. Now if they could just get on with it. Harmeet Dhillon is not going to settle. She's an activist, and it's clear Damore does not give one shit about Google's money at this point. If he had he would have taken the hush money.

 

[altkiwi01]

By the way, James has finally broken some of his radio silence. It looks like he has found a job somewhere.

https://twitter.com/JamesADamore/status/1034623633174478849

I would archive, but there isn't really much useful info there.

Probably a good thing he didn't name the company (for obvious reasons).

 

[AnOminous]

Well that is a relief. Was having visions of judge Roy Bean being handed this mess.

That might not be that terrible. I'm pretty sure Judge Bean would take one look at a troon before drawing his six shooter and deciding the case right there and then.

 

[Corbin Dallas Multipass]

I... can't imagine why any proprietary information would need to come out. This case is about HR hiring and firing practices.

Or is google planning to just print out every line of code ever produced there just to bog the case down?

 

[AnOminous]

I... can't imagine why any proprietary information would need to come out. This case is about HR hiring and firing practices.

Or is google planning to just print out every line of code ever produced there just to bog the case down?

The fact that they sealed the complaint, which reveals no proprietary information whatsoever, shows how biased this decision is.

Try being a normal person or even a normal sized corporation and say that a court has to seal everything about your case because it might embarrass you. They'll fucking laugh in your face. They don't care if it destroys your fucking life entiretly.

But be Google and pull the same shit and they're all "yassa massa."

It's absolute bullshit. The only people really in a position to challenge it are media because Google would spend anyone else into the ground about this illegal unconstitutional star chamber bullshit.

 

[Autopsy]

tfw the EU has more balls and teeth to go after businesses for anti trust lawsuits than the US does

Not so much teeth- The EU's modus operandi is fat fines no one takes seriously and letting companies pair them down until they get a settlement; the US just fucks your shit up inexorably with the only way out being to cave to nearly every demand- because that's the way the laws were written. It helps that the money-centers of businesses tend to fall on US soil so they can't viably run away.
The situation is something akin to a yappy chihuahua and a pit-bull as guard dogs, but the pit-bull's been drugged and blindfolded and dressed up in pretty clothes to make it feel less intimidating, nearly to the point everyone has forgotten it's the one that will bite your leg off given half a chance.

 

[AnOminous]

Not so much teeth- The EU's modus operandi is fat fines no one takes seriously and letting companies pair them down until they get a settlement; the US just fucks your shit up inexorably with the only way out being to cave to nearly every demand- because that's the way the laws were written.

The only companies big enough to go after for antitrust can just do what Microsoft did: drag the case out until they have a friendly President who drops the case.

 

[Autopsy]

The only companies big enough to go after for antitrust can just do what Microsoft did: drag the case out until they have a friendly President who drops the case.

• Microsoft was forced to sign an actionable decree that would prevent them from force packaging OS with hardware, the initial objective; also later hassled over IE inclusion.
• Microsoft got fucked out of a merger that would have given them undisputed control of another huge chunk of the digital market (personal finance) and forced them to wage a costly war on another tech giant or abandon their expansion schedule entirely.
• Microsoft settled, made to stop raising prices of old versions to force people to buy new ones, abandoning the right to manipulate price schedules, order exclusive contracts, or withhold technical information from specific (competitor) companies. It was also made to disclose their APIs to third parties.

The antitrust system has been pretending to be blind and stupid since the 00s, that's a big part of what I'm frustrated by, but Microsoft got their ass handed to them very quickly in ways the EU will never manage. If these measures hadn't been enacted, a breakup would be an inevitability even with our current courts; certainly it could have been argued that action would have been necessary within US Antitrust law, a fact that has not been meaningfully contested, even in the legal defense.

 

[AnOminous]

The antitrust system has been pretending to be blind and stupid since the 00s, that's a big part of what I'm frustrated by, but Microsoft got their ass handed to them very quickly in ways the EU will never manage.

All of those things they agreed to were more profitable for them than what they agreed to stop doing. There was a very slight dip from 2000 and this was during the implosion of the tech sector, and then a steady upward trend for nearly 10 years, only interrupted when Apple's trajectory went parabolic.

 

[RadicalCentrist]

The only people really in a position to challenge it are media

Ah, thankfully the media stands ever ready as the watchdog of publ-... why is this thread where I get the most updates on this case?