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

Microsoft Coffee

microsoftcoffee.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

71–80 of 394 posts

Re: Microsoft Coffee

#71

Post by musingsole »

duxup wrote: post #64
musingsole wrote: post #53

Earlier quoted context omitted.

When you're employed by a corporation, to what degree are you an individual and to what degree are you an extension of that corporation? Microsoft isn't a person or individual. For MS to support something...really means some hundreds of individuals inside MS support a thing and have coordinated to communicate that support to the other hundreds and BOOM, MS now supports a thing (or doesn't). All of this is about permi…

>MS supported this by virtue of MS employees doing it. Would that apply to say crimes? Should corporate then get to tell people what else they can't do since being an employee includes ' support'? I think you're inadvertently wandering into some really wonky territory.

> I think you're inadvertently wandering into some really wonky territory.

Undoubtedly :P

As for crimes, I think the US legal system supports my view more than the one that clearly separates these employees from the MS entity. MS may fire the employees as a result of their actions, but up to a point, MS is fully liable for their actions as representatives of the company long before the employees are liable as individuals.

Re: Microsoft Coffee

#72

Post by hedora »

xwdv wrote: post #58
juotlrjrb wrote: post #37

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How can a regular non-executive employee be guilty of a SEC violation, for something like this? If I'm a Tesla employee and I make a fake image about a future Tesla airplane, is that a SEC violation?

You are attempting to manipulate the stock price, likely for personal gain.

It is difficult to prove intent, especially if the press release is absurd, released on April 1st, and you’re attempting to prove it wasn’t intended as a prank.

Having said that, I’m holding a bag of SO stock because I thought they really were going to start monetizing by charging for copy-paste. /s

Re: Microsoft Coffee

#73

Post by goat_whisperer »

The amount of entitlement in the tech industry is astounding.

This person is complaining about how Microsoft didn't enjoy this prank, which involved hours of planning (during working hours I assumed), cost actual $$$ (through printing these boxes), pissed off the Company's suppliers (by delivering fake products), and in which the entire point was poke fun at the Company as being a mediocre copy-cat?

Jeez, people really need to develop a sense of humor!

/s

Re: Microsoft Coffee

#74

Post by honkdaddy »

brundolf wrote: post #65
Geeflow wrote: post #34

Is there any reason to believe that this actually happened? Conveniently, it was published on April 1st. The story itself would be a great April Fools' prank. :)

The news footage is pretty convincing

Yeah - I feel as if the task of building a fake news desk, hiring two (very convincing) actors to pose as anchors, filming it, and chopping it up in Premiere to give it the VHS look is way more effort than someone would put into a prank like this.

Re: Microsoft Coffee

#76

Post by addicted »

juotlrjrb wrote: post #37
addicted wrote: post #29

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This would be a massive SEC violation at minimum. A prison sentence would not be surprising at all. The only reason they likely didn’t get it in 1995 even is that MS PR (the one this person derides as PR flacks) apparently successfully convinced the world that this wasn’t done by MS insiders.

How can a regular non-executive employee be guilty of a SEC violation, for something like this? If I'm a Tesla employee and I make a fake image about a future Tesla airplane, is that a SEC violation?

From the article.

“ We were busy arranging a graphic design of the box, putting easter egg jokes in the tech specs on the side, leveraging corporate partnerships, and prepping to make a run of several hundred boxes through one of Microsoft’s production printing systems. This was not only kind of expensive, but a commitment, a step that would in effect put an official stamp from Microsoft on the plan.”

I suspect that this is the reason the “PR flacks” didn’t just dismiss this as a joke gone wrong, but went beyond to insist (lie) that it was done by outsiders.

Re: Microsoft Coffee

#79

Post by exhilaration »

brundolf wrote: post #65
Geeflow wrote: post #34

Is there any reason to believe that this actually happened? Conveniently, it was published on April 1st. The story itself would be a great April Fools' prank. :)

The news footage is pretty convincing

If they faked that footage and even went as far faking the messed up VHS tracking, I will be very very impressed.

Re: Microsoft Coffee

#80

Post by addicted »

juotlrjrb wrote: post #37
addicted wrote: post #29

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This would be a massive SEC violation at minimum. A prison sentence would not be surprising at all. The only reason they likely didn’t get it in 1995 even is that MS PR (the one this person derides as PR flacks) apparently successfully convinced the world that this wasn’t done by MS insiders.

How can a regular non-executive employee be guilty of a SEC violation, for something like this? If I'm a Tesla employee and I make a fake image about a future Tesla airplane, is that a SEC violation?

Non executives can very much be guilty of SEC violations.

If you make a fake image of a Tesla airplane, create branding for that fake Tesla image, and post it all over the official Tesla PR accounts, without immediately or at least in the fine print, explaining this is an Apr 1 joke, Tesla, and likely you, would be legally liable.

Post reply on HN