Interview Only w/ Mark Lanier & Rahul Ravipudi - Winning A Landmark Case Against Big Tech

Veteran trial lawyers Mark Lanier and Rahul Ravipudi — the legal team that just won a landmark bellwether verdict against Meta and YouTube — join the Chuck Toddcast to explain how civil litigation is doing more to rein in big tech than the federal government has managed in a decade. They walk through how they persuaded a jury that these platforms engaged in negligent and punitive conduct toward children, systematically dismantling the "it's on the parents" defense by showing that parents simply aren't equipped to manage what amounts to engineered addiction — and that when that addiction takes hold in children, it causes irreparable harm by literally rewiring developing brains. They reveal that Meta's own internal research documents were devastating at trial, that former tech employees took the stand to call out the companies' safety practices, and that these platforms behaved exactly like Big Tobacco did — knowing the harm was real and burying the evidence. They break down how they proved addiction by design: endless scroll, autoplay, slot-machine psychology, and deliberately hidden safety features all created to maximize "time spent," a corporate metric fundamentally at odds with user wellbeing.  The conversation gets into the nuts and bolts of the legal strategy and what comes next. Lanier and Ravipudi describe cross-examining Mark Zuckerberg, who they say couldn't handle basic questions about protecting kids, and explain why YouTube's defense — that it's a streaming service like Netflix rather than social media — collapsed once its own internal documents consistently referred to the platform as "social media." They explain that this is a bellwether case, meaning the judge used nine representative cases to establish facts and conditions that will now apply to roughly 3,000 other pending cases, with eight more trials coming and a settlement fund likely in the companies' future. The attorneys discuss whether tech companies are simply pricing these verdicts in as a cost of doing business (they argue settling would actually be a PR boon for the platforms), draw parallels and distinctions between big tech and tobacco, and offer concrete policy recommendations: a meaningful minimum age requirement, scrapping Section 230, nighttime curfews for minors, and removing the endless scroll. Their bottom line: tech companies won't do the right thing unless they're forced to, and the legal system is finally catching up to what regulators refused to address. Thank you Wildgrain for sponsoring. Visit http://wildgrain.com/TODDCAST and use the code "TODDCAST" at checkout to receive $30 off your first box PLUS free Croissants for life! Protect your family with life insurance from Ethos. Get up to $3 million in coverage in as little as 10 minutes at https://ethos.com/chuck. Application times may vary. Rates may vary. Link in bio or go to https://getsoul.com & enter code TODDCAST for 30% off your first order. Timeline: (Timestamps may vary based on advertisements) 00:00 Mark Lanier & Rahul Ravipudi join the Chuck ToddCast 02:30 Civil litigation is doing more to rein in big tech than government 03:00 You can’t fight big tech without an army of lawyers 04:00 Meta & Youtube found liable by jury of negligence & punitive conduct 05:30 How did you push back on the narrative of “parental challenges”? 06:30 Parents aren’t equipped to control kids social media addiction/use 07:15 Addiction in children is an irreparable harm, brain is rewired 08:15 Meta’s own internal research documents were damning 09:30 Without guardrails, tech companies race to the bottom for engagement 10:30 Tech companies behaved just like big tobacco, knew harm was real 12:00 Former tech employees called out safety practices at trial 13:00 How did you prove addiction at trial? 14:15 Proved the companies deliberately made products more addictive 15:00 Endless scroll, autoplay and slot machine science used to trap you 16:30 Platforms make it hard to access or find safety features 17:30 Goal of “increasing time spent” is at odds with users well-being 19:45 Architect for Youtube algorithm was forced to take the stand 20:30 Architect proposed changing algorithm for kids, didn’t happen 21:30 TikTok & Snapchat settled, did that clear the way to win in court? 23:30 Plaintiffs had finished discovery before any settlements 24:30 Youtube’s lawyer argued it’s a streaming platform and not social media 26:15 Despite their protests, Youtube is not like Netflix because of features 28:00 Exhaustive internal documents refer to Youtube as “social media” 29:30 How was the experience of cross-examining Mark Zuckerberg? 31:00 Zuckerberg couldn’t handle some very basic questions about kids 33:00 What makes this case a “bellwether case”? 34:30 Judge used 9 cases to determine facts & conditions for other 3,000 36:30 8 more trials are upcoming 38:00 Companies will likely need to create a settlement fund 38:30 Similarities and differences between big tech & tobacco companies 40:30 Companies achieved a critical mass of kids using the product 42:00 Are companies pricing in penalties/settlements as “cost of doing business”? 43:15 Settling these cases would be a PR boon for these companies 44:45 Preview of the upcoming trials against the tech companies 47:00 What are some good guardrails congress can put on the tech companies? 48:45 An age limit of would do good, as would scrapping Section 230 50:30 A nighttime curfew and removing the endless scroll also has benefits 51:45 There’s no law mandating 25 years of age to rent car, industry imposed it 52:30 Companies might self-regulate after losing lawsuits 53:45 These companies won’t do the right thing unless forced to do so 54:15 Expectations for the appeals process? 56:00 What year do you expect all of these cases to be fully resolved? 57:30 A recommendation algorithm should make a platform a publisherSee omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.