Tech Company Lawsuits

Discussions focus on the legality of actions against tech companies, potential lawsuits by users or regulators, risks of corporate legal retaliation, and enforceability of laws like CFAA.

📉 Falling 0.5x Legal
4,164
Comments
19
Years Active
5
Top Authors
#6398
Topic ID

Activity Over Time

2008
11
2009
55
2010
95
2011
155
2012
202
2013
209
2014
196
2015
129
2016
187
2017
204
2018
221
2019
236
2020
295
2021
422
2022
423
2023
392
2024
340
2025
360
2026
32

Keywords

NY US CCPA S230 TBD PC ICE FB HN en.m sue law court sued legal assess penalties company libel courts

Sample Comments

timeon Dec 27, 2024 View on HN

Maybe legal threat for the company operating it? Would that help?

swat535 Jul 15, 2025 View on HN

Even if it's illegal, you'll have to fight them in court.OpenAI will certainly punish you for this and most likely make an example out of you, regardless of the outcome.The goal is corporate punishment, not the rule of the law.

chx Sep 17, 2023 View on HN

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=36837273 are you sure they are not prosecuted

oneplane Jun 12, 2022 View on HN

Just because it's unlikely to happen doesn't mean it's overriding anything. They might simply delete all references, out-lawyer anyone who tries to sue them or simply ignore everything since they are based in China. Again, just because it is illegal doesn't mean therefore something will change. It just means it's illegal. Then you have litigation, but that might not change anything either. So the situation is the same, which means that your proposed action is unlikely to

jackcarter Jan 21, 2018 View on HN

That doesn't mean you won't have be harassed by the law: https://www.wired.com/2014/07/five-sue-gov-over-targeting/

m_khranovskyi Feb 12, 2025 View on HN

I've got it. In worst case scenario - what can be done? Banned? Will they sue?

adrianN Mar 26, 2019 View on HN

Somebody has to own the computers. You can sue those people if they don't comply with the law.

yawaworht12 Apr 26, 2017 View on HN

It's frightening to see users on a forum now support a bad law like the CFAA because it could be used against a company that they happen to like at the moment. A bad law is a bad law. It doesn't magically become a good law when it could be used against someone you don't like.At worst this should result in tortious interference as a trespass to chattels case with damages calculated at the cost of the computing services that Lyft was denied.<a href="https://en.m.wiki

viraptor Nov 13, 2024 View on HN

That doesn't feel likely. 1 because Guardian isn't really in a position to enter a legal battle vs ~unlimited spiteful money. 2 because this is likely not enforcible if anyone actually has a reason to sue them abroad where the company has presence. It's just terms of service rather than a contract binding you in other ways - they can deny you service after you sue.

aaronsw Mar 11, 2009 View on HN

I assume you mean "sue" for "sure". They can try, but what we're doing is legal, so they won't succeed any more than they would by suing MAE East for routing packets to some bad site.