I have a theory that you can measure someone's power by how many people can hate them without them having to care.

Why should Zuck care if the movie paints him in a poor light? He is an near-infinitely powerful megabillionaire before the movie, and he is one afterwards. The movie could show him eating babies for an hour and a half and it likely wouldn't budge Facebook's stock price.

If I were to name this theory, I'd call it "The Law of Larry Ellison". Because no matter what you do, you'll never be as hated as Ellison and look how much that has affected him. I don't think he's sailing is megayacht to his giant private Hawaiian island and crying himself to sleep because the world doesn't like him.

It's possible that he wanted to, but was advised that making a big deal about it would only draw more attention and make things worse.

So I guess he didn’t have enough money and power to open the right doors?

Or perhaps it’s really hard to win a defamation case against works of fiction. No matter how much money and power you have.

Zuckerberg is, and was, especially after the movie came out, much more famous than Weinstein, and the portrayals in question are different. One is unflattering, the other is attempting to cover a felony.

When there's an unflattering depiction out there of you, bringing more attention to it might be counterproductive, depending on how bad it is.

If you're worried about going to prison, all of a sudden how unflattering you're seen likely becomes secondary to that.

Even if you win the case, you've still drawn a lot of extra unwanted attention to it.

It perhaps it doesn’t matter and ignoring it is the best course of action?