When it comes to voluntary consumption or use, I always vote for freedom over restriction or censorship. Let people eat all the fried chicken they want if that is what they want to do with their hard-earned dollars.
- freedom to be racist against people of color
- freedom to do hitler salutes wherever you want
- freedom to carry a gun to school or to mcdonalds
- freedom to get lead poisoning from your municipal drinking water
- freedom to coal roll your truck next to people
- freedom to have car tires without any profile that can explode any time
- freedom to get bankrupted by uninsured asshat's car crashing into you
- freedom to work at age 80 as a walmart greeter
Freedom to raise your children without having them exploited for profit is also freedom.
Every so often we get a wave of socialism/communism hitting HN as a new generation is exposed to these ideas. It is a seductive idea, to be fair, has convinced many an intellectual over the years. It's very persuasive, especially on paper, yet it keeps failing in real life for one simple reason. It doesn't account for the human psyche, which is this:
People don't want to be equal. They want to be better. People are envious of success, they wish it upon themselves, not upon others. For, would you consider it success if everyone achieved what you did?
It’s worse than that, it’s like bringing a knife to a fight against an entire army equipped with all the latest and greatest weapons of the day.
It would be a huge gamble and reputable law firms would have to feel extremely confident that they wouldn't end up on the losing side. That's a big ask regardless of how good you case is. These tech companies have enormous warchests, can drag these things out essentially forever, and the odds they'll find a technicality that would blunt the lawsuit are very high.
Regardless, the judicial branch is a perfect example of the limits of freedom in practice, and the legislative does, in fact, decide who one can and cannot sue.