Judge rejects Sleeping Giants’ multi-billion lawsuit against big tech

Judge Marcelo Augusto Oliveira, from the 41st Civil Court of the State of São Paulo, extinguished a lawsuit by the digital activism group Sleeping Giants against the companies Google, Twitter, Meta (owner of Facebook and Instagram), Telegram and Spotify, within the scope of discussions on PL 2630, called “PL das Fake News”. The Sleeping Giants wanted companies to stop disclosing messages with their position on the bill and pay a fine of BRL 1 billion for alleged abusive practices that would harm the consumer – in this case, the user of websites and social media. The decision is dated July 4.

The dismissal of the action was due to procedural issues: “the procedural route chosen proves to be inadequate for the true claim made, and the process should be terminated without resolution of the merits”, said Judge Oliveira. To justify his decision, however, he also made a number of observations about the nature and goals of the Sleeping Giants. “It is well-known and public knowledge that the author association acts in Brazilian society as a political and activist organization (‘club of giants’, in the Twitter profile) (‘virtual activism group’, defined the magazine Look) (‘liberal organization of digital activists’, according to Wikipedia). In its public activities, on networks and social media, including platforms maintained by the defendant companies themselves, such as Twitter, Instagram and Facebook, the author association presents a very well-defined political and activist position, based on and made explicit in the public debate. There is not a single conduct aimed at protecting consumers; just political action and defense of its ideology”, says the magistrate. in fact, the modus operandi of the Sleeping Giants is the pressure on advertisers from communication vehicles whose editorial line is at odds with the political convictions of digital activists, with the aim of financially suffocating these press bodies – the People’s Gazette was the target of this strategy in 2020.

Oliveira goes on to state that “the intention of the author association [o Sleeping Giants], with the request to compel the companies required to impartiality on the respective platforms, is confused with its own interest, politically oriented, to influence the democratic public debate” and that “behind the justification of neutralizing search engines and software of research, hides the undisguised pretension of the author association to control the direction of the flow of information, through the cleavage of news and, as a consequence, the public discussions resulting from them”. The magistrate concludes: “what the plaintiff association intends, in fact, under the false guise of consumer protection, is to interfere in the functioning of the services of the requested companies, so that it is provided in accordance with its ideology and its political bias”.