how about going after the companies buying up all the homes [slate.com]. At least the ones that aren't in a burned out section of the rust belt with no jobs.
Or how about speaking up about Nvidia buying the only other viable chip designer (I'm not counting Apple as that's not their core business, and they won't share their chips with other manufacturers).
Those are all worthy of pursuit but there's no reason the FTC should have to abandon one for another. They have more than one lawyer. They should be pursuing all of them.
I'm aware that Facebook isn't a person (despite certain court rulings), and I definitely sympathize with going after them again on just the specifics of this one situation - I'm not arguing on behalf of Facebook by any means. But precedent-wise, doesn't there have to be some point beyond which pursuing the same matter repeatedly after previously losing their case constitutes harassment or something?
The FTC didn't lose the case. It was dismissed without prejudice. The idea is that the if a case is dismissed early enough in the processes and for mostly procedural or technical reasons, then the defendant never actually stood trial for their charges, and double jeopardy doesn't apply. One way to look at it was that the case was deferred, and thus the main concern is the right to a speedy trial, not double jeopardy.
If a judge does think the prosecutor or plaintiff is acting in bad faith, then they can dism
Or how about speaking up about Nvidia buying the only other viable chip designer (I'm not counting Apple as that's not their core business, and they won't share their chips with other manufacturers).
Or how about the massive consolidation in farmland [landreport.com] or in hospitals [beckershos...review.com]?
Seriously, there are so many bigger fish to fry than Facebook.
Instead of going after Facebook
Here's a novel idea... why not pursue all of these?
Those are all worthy of pursuit but there's no reason the FTC should have to abandon one for another. They have more than one lawyer. They should be pursuing all of them.
I'm aware that Facebook isn't a person (despite certain court rulings), and I definitely sympathize with going after them again on just the specifics of this one situation - I'm not arguing on behalf of Facebook by any means. But precedent-wise, doesn't there have to be some point beyond which pursuing the same matter repeatedly after previously losing their case constitutes harassment or something?
The FTC didn't lose the case. It was dismissed without prejudice. The idea is that the if a case is dismissed early enough in the processes and for mostly procedural or technical reasons, then the defendant never actually stood trial for their charges, and double jeopardy doesn't apply. One way to look at it was that the case was deferred, and thus the main concern is the right to a speedy trial, not double jeopardy.
If a judge does think the prosecutor or plaintiff is acting in bad faith, then they can dism