undefined | Better HN

0 pointsmagicalist4y ago0 comments

> I think within some margin of interpretation, it's reasonable to state that if the text in the complaint is as such, it's backed by one or more internal emails I personally don't have access to.

ec109685's explanation seems plausible and could easily be misexplained in this way if your goal was to get quotes on twitter.

> As I think it's pretty implausible that the Texas AG invented a meeting between the ad team and the AMP team and a reason for it out of thin air.

It doesn't have to be out of thin air to be exaggerated or misconstrued. And I definitely wouldn't rely on indicted Attorney General Ken Paxton for ethical behavior or an even handed application of the law.

0 comments

2 comments · 1 top-level

ocdtrekkie4y ago· 1 in thread

I can understand your suspicion of Ken Paxton, but this is also part of a very high profile case involving dozens of states and literally hundreds of attorneys. And the precise nature of the claims will likely be still being litigated on ten years from now. So there's a lot of incentive to be accurate on the claims out of the gate.

That being said, I think it'd be great if all the material in the discovery process was available to the public. A company of Google's size has no excuse to operate in the dark.

jefftk4y ago

> the precise nature of the claims will likely be still being litigated on ten years from now

This also sets up a situation where the AG can make exaggerated claims now, score the points, and have moved on by the time we get a resolution.

j / k navigate · click thread line to collapse