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

Instagram faces $500B in fines alleging it harvested biometric data

businessinsider.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

31–40 of 112 posts

Re: Instagram faces $500B in fines alleging it harvested biometric data

#31

Post by papito »

Hamuko wrote: post #29
rmrfstar wrote: post #12

Today I learned: the idea that a corporation can commit a crime is a very new one. [1] People commit crimes, not companies. [1] William Blackstone, Commentaries on the Laws of England 464 (1765) (“A corporation cannot commit treason or felony or other crime in its corporate capacity though it’s members may in their distinct individual capacities.”)

> People commit crimes, not companies. I thought corporations are people, my friend.

Corporations are "people" when it comes to their thirst for massive political influence, but just when they get into legal trouble, they are suddenly NOT a person, but a vague multi-layered blob, impossible to prosecute.

Re: Instagram faces $500B in fines alleging it harvested biometric data

#32

Post by helsinkiandrew »

> the tool automatically scans the faces of people pictured in other users' posts, even if they don't use Instagram and didn't agree to the terms of service.

This suggests to me that the number of people affected is much more than the 100 million Instagram users, and the potential fine much higher.

Re: Instagram faces $500B in fines alleging it harvested biometric data

#33

Post by bildung »

rmrfstar wrote: post #12

Today I learned: the idea that a corporation can commit a crime is a very new one. [1] People commit crimes, not companies. [1] William Blackstone, Commentaries on the Laws of England 464 (1765) (“A corporation cannot commit treason or felony or other crime in its corporate capacity though it’s members may in their distinct individual capacities.”)

That nicely illustrates the importance of the context of quotes: At that time the concept of limited liability didn't yet exist like today. The corporation itself wasn't the same as a modern corporation, yet had the same name.

Re: Instagram faces $500B in fines alleging it harvested biometric data

#34

Post by Scoundreller »

Hamuko wrote: post #29
rmrfstar wrote: post #12

Today I learned: the idea that a corporation can commit a crime is a very new one. [1] People commit crimes, not companies. [1] William Blackstone, Commentaries on the Laws of England 464 (1765) (“A corporation cannot commit treason or felony or other crime in its corporate capacity though it’s members may in their distinct individual capacities.”)

> People commit crimes, not companies. I thought corporations are people, my friend.

That started in 1886: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Santa_Clara_County_v._Southern....

Re: Instagram faces $500B in fines alleging it harvested biometric data

#35

Post by dahfizz »

papito wrote: post #31
Hamuko wrote: post #29

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> People commit crimes, not companies. I thought corporations are people, my friend.

Corporations are "people" when it comes to their thirst for massive political influence, but just when they get into legal trouble, they are suddenly NOT a person, but a vague multi-layered blob, impossible to prosecute.

I think you're a little confused...

> but just when they get into legal trouble, they are suddenly NOT a person, but a vague multi-layered blob, impossible to prosecute.

This is exactly why corporations are legally people. We can prosecute the whole blob instead of trying to assign blame to individuals.

To see how this works, take a look at People v Rochester Ry. Light co (NY 1909)[1]. A corporation killed someone through negligence, but nobody was ever punished because a corporation was not considered a legal person and it was impossible to reach into the vague blob and charge individuals.

[1]https://cite.case.law/nys/114/755/

Re: Instagram faces $500B in fines alleging it harvested biometric data

#36

Post by iso1631 »

solarkraft wrote: post #17
sergiotapia wrote: post #15

They need to make people responsible, not the corporate entity.

Why? The company profited from the crime. That would create some interesting incentives.

Every facebook shareholder profited from it

Re: Instagram faces $500B in fines alleging it harvested biometric data

#37

Post by [deleted] »

bildung wrote: post #33
rmrfstar wrote: post #12

Today I learned: the idea that a corporation can commit a crime is a very new one. [1] People commit crimes, not companies. [1] William Blackstone, Commentaries on the Laws of England 464 (1765) (“A corporation cannot commit treason or felony or other crime in its corporate capacity though it’s members may in their distinct individual capacities.”)

That nicely illustrates the importance of the context of quotes: At that time the concept of limited liability didn't yet exist like today. The corporation itself wasn't the same as a modern corporation, yet had the same name.

[deleted]

Re: Instagram faces $500B in fines alleging it harvested biometric data

#38

Post by iso1631 »

te_chris wrote: post #22
sergiotapia wrote: post #15

They need to make people responsible, not the corporate entity.

Bollocks. The company as an entity played naughty, so it should, as an entity, get punished. Otherwise the stakeholders get a free ride.

There's two aspects

1) Punishing those that did the illegal thing

2) Punishing those that profited from the illegal thing

If a mafia boss profits from getting a goon to rough up a shop owner for protection money, both the goon and the boss are punished.

Re: Instagram faces $500B in fines alleging it harvested biometric data

#39

Post by wwwwwwwww »

Hamuko wrote: post #29
rmrfstar wrote: post #12

Today I learned: the idea that a corporation can commit a crime is a very new one. [1] People commit crimes, not companies. [1] William Blackstone, Commentaries on the Laws of England 464 (1765) (“A corporation cannot commit treason or felony or other crime in its corporate capacity though it’s members may in their distinct individual capacities.”)

> People commit crimes, not companies. I thought corporations are people, my friend.

To use modern lingo:

Corporations are people-fluid. They can chose to be people or not. Forcing people-ness onto them would be corporate-phobic.

Re: Instagram faces $500B in fines alleging it harvested biometric data

#40

Post by [deleted] »

dahfizz wrote: post #35
papito wrote: post #31

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Corporations are "people" when it comes to their thirst for massive political influence, but just when they get into legal trouble, they are suddenly NOT a person, but a vague multi-layered blob, impossible to prosecute.

I think you're a little confused... > but just when they get into legal trouble, they are suddenly NOT a person, but a vague multi-layered blob, impossible to prosecute. This is exactly why corporations are legally people. We can prosecute the whole blob instead of trying to assign blame to individuals. To see how this works, take a look at People v Rochester Ry. Light co (NY 1909)[1]. A corporation killed someone th…

[deleted]
Post reply on HN