Like, maybe not because of censorship per se, but maybe for abusing their power as an oligopoly or going against the desire of their users?
Like, maybe not because of censorship per se, but maybe for abusing their power as an oligopoly or going against the desire of their users?
Cool, very free market liberal and stuff. It’s just that… you don’t sue companies to affect their stock. That’s entirely separate from the legal system and not civil liability at all.
Might not be why you do it.
Certainly suits can and do effect stock prices, based on investors perception of future gains. Both the direct cost of losing a suit (if it’s big enough) and the indirect cost of losing business as a result, can cause this.
I really don’t see either of those scenarios happening here. The investors know there’s a monopoly situation and nothing will change until that changes
What suits?
We are losing the plot here. What lawsuit would you bring to these companies for doing this? As I said elsewhere, antitrust measures, maybe, but that’s the government’s job. These development companies complaining? Could be, but unlikely. There’s probably legalese in their deals to cover this.
What is anybody here getting sued for and who is suing them? People are just saying things.
“You took away my porn by telling a big company that they couldn’t manage payments of products made by a bunch of different tiny companies” is not a thing you can bring in front of a judge. Do we all realize this?
Do people on the Internet think that lawsuits are how you complain when you don’t like something?
Well I wouldn’t sue them myself.
Ibwas talking about the general link between suits and stock prices. Which I don’t think is especially relevant in this case for the reasons you’re talking about, and others