I don't think I really care who wins that one, but :

Meta responded in October by filing a motion to dismiss, arguing the sporadic downloads were consistent with ordinary ‘personal use’ by employees and visitors on the corporate network.

Oh, yeah, just your ordinary downloading porn on the corporate network of a tech giant megacorp, as you do.

Either a lie or an admission of baffling incompetence.

At first I was like "9TB!? That's like a billion bajillion. It's like Dr Evil demanding $100 billion in 1969!"

And then I realized I have over 9TB of liberated media on my NAS. I really need to adjust my concept of technology, not to mention the passage of time.

I mean, 911 was only ten years ago, right? Right!?

Those are rookie numbers

From the article, the 9tb are related to the other case, which is about book data.

Meta’s response that this is personal use is actually a pretty good argument. This case mentions something like 157 downloads over the last seven years. That does sound like it could be random employees. Plausibly.

But wouldn’t their IT infrastructure block random employees from running torrents on the network? If it was company directed, wouldn’t they use like a VPN from some regular common VPN provider so that this all looked like some random Joe downloading porn rather than Meta? It does mention they allegedly have some “secret” IPs on AWS, which is also funny to me.

Gee, that's a lot of homework.

How 'bout a NSFW tag there buddy.

EDIT: The thumbnail for this post is of a woman wearing only a bra laying seductively on a bed. I realize some users may not see this or have thumbnails active. But some do.