this post was submitted on 25 Sep 2023
61 points (100.0% liked)

Technology

37699 readers
234 users here now

A nice place to discuss rumors, happenings, innovations, and challenges in the technology sphere. We also welcome discussions on the intersections of technology and society. If it’s technological news or discussion of technology, it probably belongs here.

Remember the overriding ethos on Beehaw: Be(e) Nice. Each user you encounter here is a person, and should be treated with kindness (even if they’re wrong, or use a Linux distro you don’t like). Personal attacks will not be tolerated.

Subcommunities on Beehaw:


This community's icon was made by Aaron Schneider, under the CC-BY-NC-SA 4.0 license.

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

cross-posted from: https://lemmy.ml/post/5486771

We did an analysis of the Google antitrust trial. Last week, over half of the trial was held behind closed doors because the judge, Amit Mehta, is deferring to Google on the need for secrecy.

top 2 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] Hirom@beehaw.org 28 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

Look, I’m a trial judge. I am not anyone that understands the industry and the markets in the way that you do. And so I take seriously when companies are telling me that if this gets disclosed, it’s going to cause competitive harm. And I think it behooves me to be somewhat conservative in thinking about that issue, because, you know, I can’t see around every corner.

If a judge doesn't understand the industry enough, or doesn't have independent experts to help him make informed decision on closed sessions, would he be able to make any informed decision on the case?

I guess we'll see... unless of course if everything happens during closed sessions.

[–] ultratiem@lemmy.ca 9 points 1 year ago

Sounds like a judge literally bought and paid for my whatever company has the deepest pocket and willing to spend.

What a muppet.