Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Martin Shkreli has been sentenced to seven years in prison

theverge.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

161–170 of 446 posts

Re: Martin Shkreli has been sentenced to seven years in prison

#161

Post by s73v3r_ »

sigstoat wrote: post #106
jcoffland wrote: post #22

The good news is that the Wu Tang album Shkreli bought is forfeit and can now presumably be released to the public. https://www.npr.org/sections/thetwo-way/2018/03/05/590980850...

that's not how intellectual property, property in general, or being forced to pay fines works, as is pretty clear if you read to the end of that article. if he still owned the album, and it is seized by the government, it would go up for auction, at which point whoever pays for it gets it. and they'd be under no more obligation to release/sell it than shrekli was.

We could start a GoFundMe to purchase the album and release it.

Re: Martin Shkreli has been sentenced to seven years in prison

#162

Post by seltzered_ »

I realize the actual charges are for different things, but I find myself comparing Shkreli's actions of hiking up daraprim prices to John Kapoor's fraud charges to sell opioids ( https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2017/10/doj-billionaire-... ). So far one of the doctors involved in the latter case got four years ( https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2018-03-09/ivy-leagu... ). More light needs to be shined on Kapoor's case (and the practices in Big Pharma in general) if it's impacting more lives.

I don't like Shkreli's obnoxiousness, yet tried listening to his reasoning in why he raised the daraprim price versus other drugs. His talk last year at Harvard ( https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n3bpXHMP4ww ) dives a bit into the thought process.

Re: Martin Shkreli has been sentenced to seven years in prison

#163

Post by ctrl-j »

rayiner wrote: post #132
otalp wrote: post #92

It does say something depressing about our laws that he got sent to prison for the thing where he lied to rich people while still making them money rather than the thing where he extorted sick poor people...which is still fully legal even if the majority of society thinks it shouldn't.

Not it doesn’t. Our legal framework doesn’t oblige you to save someone’s life just because you have the means to do so. If it did, we’d all be in big trouble—for the cost of a fully loaded MacBook Pro, you could save someone from malaria in Africa. The fact that people think a particular unpopular thing shouldn’t be legal doesn’t change that. There are a lot of things people believe should be illegal that aren’t ille…

So, you would argue that directly profiting from raising the price of a necessary life-saving medication is equivalent to making charitable donations to foreign countries?

That seems to be a stretch to me...

Re: Martin Shkreli has been sentenced to seven years in prison

#164

Post by s73v3r_ »

hokumguru wrote: post #112
techman9 wrote: post #91

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That doesn't make his claims any less fraudulent.

While definitely immoral and risky I might abide by "no harm no foul" - no one was harmed in this, end sum is positive

This time. Because he paid those investors with proceeds from his other company. But letting him off here means he'll likely do it again, and those investors might not be so lucky.

Re: Martin Shkreli has been sentenced to seven years in prison

#165

Post by brucephillips »

bhouston wrote: post #5

He was so obnoxious that I guess it is easy to be happy about that, but he was so small time in the grand scheme of things. But nearly no bankers responsible for the 2008 financial crisis ever went to jail: https://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2015/09/how-wal...

Nowhere in that article does it describe an actual crime that went unprosecuted.

Shkreli broke the law. The financiers causing the financial collapse did not. Perhaps the laws should be changed.

Re: Martin Shkreli has been sentenced to seven years in prison

#166

Post by dragonwriter »

DanBC wrote: post #127
dayaz36 wrote: post #122

This is insane. Sentencing guidelines for his crime was 0-12 months. He didn't even lose his investors any money.

Can you link to the US sentencing guidelines please? Elsehwere in the thread I've linked to the UK version, and it seems he'd have got a similar sentence over here. Although we do have parole, so he'd be out a lot sooner.

> Can you link to the US sentencing guidelines please?

https://www.ussc.gov/guidelines

Re: Martin Shkreli has been sentenced to seven years in prison

#167

Post by toomuchtodo »

s73v3r_ wrote: post #153
toomuchtodo wrote: post #68

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Remember this when you end up on the wrong side of the law, and the book is thrown at you when it shouldn't be. Easy to cast the first stone. Aaron Swartz was eligible for 50 years in prison and a million dollar fine based on his computer crimes. That's fair too, right? Y'all need some empathy and compassion. People are human, and make mistakes. The punishment should fit the crime. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aaron…

Shkreli did not "make a mistake". He purposefully defrauded investors.

Aaron Swartz did not make a mistake. He purposely obtained unauthorized access to JSTOR and exfiltrated data for public consumption [1].

Poor judgment with minimal damage should not cost you a tenth of your life, or in Aaron's case, his entire life.

[1] https://archive.org/details/JSTORSwartzEvidenceAllDocs

Re: Martin Shkreli has been sentenced to seven years in prison

#168

Post by walshemj »

hb3b wrote: post #14

Cruel and unusual given the crime. Half the sentence of Jeffrey Skilling who destroyed thousands of families. No question in my mind that the judge had it out for him from the get-go.

Yes going "fuck you judge" whilst on trial does tend to have that effect.

Its also why contempt of court and malfeasance in public office has such harsh panties

Re: Martin Shkreli has been sentenced to seven years in prison

#169

Post by s73v3r_ »

swedish_mafia wrote: post #105

This is a travesty. He is sentenced not for drug prices but for this: he started a hedge fund which lost money, used some of the funds to start a pharma co, the pharma co did well went public and he returned the investors their money at a huge profit for them. Who sufffered? No one. But he misrepresented his funds performance and did not inform them of the pharma co investment. This man is an entrepreneur.

This man is not an entrepreneur, and to try and say so is to insult and demean actual entrepreneurs everywhere.

His investors got lucky that he had the funds to repay them due to his other company. Had he gotten away with this, he likely would have done it again, and those investors might not have been so lucky.

Re: Martin Shkreli has been sentenced to seven years in prison

#170

Post by Clubber »

king_magic wrote: post #101
Clubber wrote: post #83

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes, but you are getting distracted by exactly what you were supposed to get distracted by. He was hated because he hiked drug prices (and he was a dick). The news jumped all over this story and he was a perfect scapegoat. Sadly, It's still perfectly legal to corner a drug and hike the prices. That was the bigger crime, and it continues to go on, costing taxpayers and patients millions if not billions of dollars, and…

I initially did not agree with you, then re-read your posts several time, and have come to the conclusion you are absolutely right. Cornering a drug and hiking the price simply for profit and no other legitimate reason (supply chain issue, newer/more effective version, etc...) should be illegal. It is a crime, maybe not in the letter of the law, but ethically, it's a crime.

They're also leveraging the very thing that was intended to keep pharmaceuticals a legitimate industry; the FDA. The drug he (and many companies) target are drugs where the patent has expired but there is no FDA approved generic. I believe FDA approval can take up to 5 years, so that's 5 years it takes for the market to react. Of course in a free market, this would never happen because 10 other companies would start making the drug, but the FDA safeguards are being leveraged against fair competition.

Not only are these companies jacking up prices with monopolistic practices, but they are eroding the legitimacy of the FDA (also to their benefit).

Post reply on HN