> The chaos it would cause for US B2C businesses would be large.
Literally who cares? Let them deal with it. It doesn't matter how much money they lose. They should have considered the consequences of abusing people's trust and violating their privacy under questionable consent.
Corporations are vastly more powerful compared to individuals. Courts obviously need to favor the latter in the vast majority of cases. To do otherwise is injustice.
It was not a value judgement, just a prediction. Some judges do look at the impact of a ruling. I personally don't think they should be legally binding (as I suspect most HN readers do).
"doesn't matter how much money they lose" -- of course it does, these companies employ people and generate lots of government revenue (even if they skirt corporate taxes).
> these companies employ people and generate lots of government revenue (even if they skirt corporate taxes).
There are political and economic concerns, not judicial. The fact the company is important does nothing to remedy the fact that it exfiltrated private information to foreign intelligence agencies.
Literally who cares? Let them deal with it. It doesn't matter how much money they lose. They should have considered the consequences of abusing people's trust and violating their privacy under questionable consent.
Corporations are vastly more powerful compared to individuals. Courts obviously need to favor the latter in the vast majority of cases. To do otherwise is injustice.