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

United States sells Wu-Tang album forfeited by Martin Shkreli

justice.gov

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

31–40 of 117 posts

Re: United States sells Wu-Tang album forfeited by Martin Shkreli

#31

Post by PragmaticPulp »

seriousquestion wrote: post #13
chetan_v wrote: post #2

"The contract of sale contains a confidentiality provision that protects information relating to the buyer and price." Wow that sucks, would have been quite interesting to know how the government found a buyer and how much it was sold for.

What would be the justification for making it private anyway? Shouldn't this be transparent?

To prevent the buyer from becoming a target for crime.

If people know who has it, they might try to extort him or worse.

I don’t see any reason the information needs to be public.

Re: United States sells Wu-Tang album forfeited by Martin Shkreli

#32

Post by Enginerrrd »

paulpauper wrote: post #9
kgantchev wrote: post #3

I love how the government dug through the guy's entire life just to find something they could nab him on and straight up destroyed him. That's some G stuff!

The official story was that this was unrelated to the drug price hike controversy. But it makes me wonder if the outcome would had been different had he not gotten all that negative attention in the first place.

Lol, don't wonder too hard. This is a pattern with the feds. If you go out of your way to piss off the public and be a flippant asshole to Congress, you're gonna have a hard time. Long before they announced any charges, I had a conversation with my dad about how the feds were likely to cook something up on this guy.

Re: United States sells Wu-Tang album forfeited by Martin Shkreli

#33

Post by rchaud »

defaultname wrote: post #18
kgantchev wrote: post #3

I love how the government dug through the guy's entire life just to find something they could nab him on and straight up destroyed him. That's some G stuff!

He committed pretty egregious financial crimes. They didn't have to "dig" far. People do understand that most people aren't hiding major felonies or securities fraud, right? Most of us aren't evading taxes. We aren't running ponzi schemes. We aren't defrauding lenders. You can scrutinize the situation of the vast majority of people and come up with nothing beyond maybe a tag taken off a mattress (har). Somehow in the…

I wouldn't say it's post-Trump. Online discussion boards have long been home to armchair contrarianism. I will say that these days it's couched in "devil's advocate" and alarmist "your freedom is at stake!" type language.

Or, in this case, temporarily embarrassed hedge fund managers that do not wish to have such a fate befall them.

Re: United States sells Wu-Tang album forfeited by Martin Shkreli

#34

Post by hereforphone »

cool_dude85 wrote: post #27
hereforphone wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Never threaten a Clinton (I anticipate downvotes.. and they'll be reinforcing my position that they're off-limits)

What's more likely - Chelsea's hacker news goon squad is here to brigade you, or nobody is interested in reheated Rush Limbaugh mid 90s slop?

Are you aware of the drama between Shkreli and Hillary that I was referring to?

Re: United States sells Wu-Tang album forfeited by Martin Shkreli

#35

Post by nprz »

hereforphone wrote: post #8
kgantchev wrote: post #3

I love how the government dug through the guy's entire life just to find something they could nab him on and straight up destroyed him. That's some G stuff!

Never threaten a Clinton (I anticipate downvotes.. and they'll be reinforcing my position that they're off-limits)

This is getting downvotes, but it is true Shkreli got his bail revoked for offering $5000 for every strand of hair collected from HRC.

Re: United States sells Wu-Tang album forfeited by Martin Shkreli

#36

Post by pydry »

titzer wrote: post #19
kgantchev wrote: post #3

I love how the government dug through the guy's entire life just to find something they could nab him on and straight up destroyed him. That's some G stuff!

It'd be great if the government more regularly caught, prosecuted, and convicted people at this level of criminality. Otherwise the entire society collapses under the weight of abject corruption, because prosecution is a selective enforcement tool used at the whim of corrupt politicians, rather than an automatic mechanism that operates independently.

He was prosecuted because his ego meant he alienated the fuck out of everybody, including what should have been his allies.

If he'd been just a bit less outspoken theyd probably have left him alone.

Re: United States sells Wu-Tang album forfeited by Martin Shkreli

#37

Post by H8crilA »

slickrick216 wrote: post #6
kgantchev wrote: post #3

I love how the government dug through the guy's entire life just to find something they could nab him on and straight up destroyed him. That's some G stuff!

I’m convinced they did this just to get their hands on the Wu Tang album. The Ol dirty bastards in Washington have always been true fans.

It's not like it's easier to seize digital assets such as stocks in a brokerage portfolio.

Speaking of which, I guess he's completely broke that they bothered to go after this?

Re: United States sells Wu-Tang album forfeited by Martin Shkreli

#39

Post by titzer »

pydry wrote: post #36
titzer wrote: post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It'd be great if the government more regularly caught, prosecuted, and convicted people at this level of criminality. Otherwise the entire society collapses under the weight of abject corruption, because prosecution is a selective enforcement tool used at the whim of corrupt politicians, rather than an automatic mechanism that operates independently.

He was prosecuted because his ego meant he alienated the fuck out of everybody, including what should have been his allies. If he'd been just a bit less outspoken theyd probably have left him alone.

Yep, corruption sucks.

Re: United States sells Wu-Tang album forfeited by Martin Shkreli

#40

Post by rchaud »

seriousquestion wrote: post #13
chetan_v wrote: post #2

"The contract of sale contains a confidentiality provision that protects information relating to the buyer and price." Wow that sucks, would have been quite interesting to know how the government found a buyer and how much it was sold for.

What would be the justification for making it private anyway? Shouldn't this be transparent?

That would turn off a lot of buyers because it would bring undue attention. Buyers may not know the exact origin of stuff they're buying. A car for instance could formerly have belonged to a person you might not want to run into. A public record of that purchase however would make it a possible target not just for the original owner, but also any rivals he/she may have.
Post reply on HN