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

eBay pays $3M fine in blogger harassment case

bbc.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

91–100 of 146 posts

Re: eBay pays $3M fine in blogger harassment case

#92

Post by dekhn »

hsuduebc2 wrote: post #86
dekhn wrote: post #35

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I have had a snail mailed to me, via snail mail, before. I also get live tardigrades mailed, but they go by UPS.

You did something or just met a psycho?

I bought a small box aquarium and the snail in it died. I wrote to the company and they replied by mailing me a snail in a bag. IIRC, it was clearly labelled "live animal".

(over the years, I've come to enjoy snail-quariums a lot. They outlive all the fish and keep the walls clean of algae)

Re: eBay pays $3M fine in blogger harassment case

#93

Post by ethbr1 »

wharvle wrote: post #32
ipsum2 wrote: post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

eBay has the best prices on used electronics and buying weird/niche stuff that can't be found on Amazon imo.

I trust them more than Amazon. I don't trust them much, but... like, a lot more than Amazon. In our city there's a flea market in a bad part of town where the parking lot has a metal sliding gate and there's barbed wire on the roof and all the windows have bars (obviously, given the rest of that) and there are live vendors in there hawking their goods at folding tables, with about the proportion (... high) of stolen…

I know exactly the type of flea market and antique mall you're talking about, and that's the best analogy for current-Amazon and always-eBay I've heard. Ha!

Re: eBay pays $3M fine in blogger harassment case

#94

Post by frabjoused »

Scoundreller wrote: post #74

eBay was distracted trying to destroy a newsletter and AMZN ended up growing by many eBays. eBay is now worth $22b market cap, as high as $52b in recent times. AMZN is now $1.5t, about double since the period of time in question, or about 14 - 34 eBays (editted out a large portion of what I originally wrote about how many eBays of market cap AMZN has been gaining because I was off by a year in my window of time).

This is meaningless. A few employees did this. Companies are composed of people. The whole company wasn't busy being distracted. They just had a worse business model.

Re: eBay pays $3M fine in blogger harassment case

#96

Post by trinsic2 »

trinsic2 wrote: post #95

I don't know if anyone read the impact statement yet: https://www.ecommercebytes.com/C/blog/blog.pl?/pl/2024/1/170...

Looks like the execs didn't get prosecuted and it all fell to low level employees. Not really justice if the people that are still in those positions are still free.

Re: eBay pays $3M fine in blogger harassment case

#97

Post by Scoundreller »

throwaway2037 wrote: post #82
Scoundreller wrote: post #22

Their civil case is ongoing if anyone wants to follow here: https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/60073359/steiner-v-ebay... Complaint is pretty damning (if true): https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.mad.236...

Outstanding post. Thank you to share. Page 5, paragraph 12: > Yikes. If the defendants lose, do you have any idea how large the settlement might be?

My guess is that it won't be decided by a judge and we won't find out. But maybe not if the defendants are out for blood more than money.

Re: eBay pays $3M fine in blogger harassment case

#98

Post by [deleted] »

heads wrote: post #21
recursive wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Clearly the ordering is increasing in value Here's your mistake. Alphabet ordering is decreasing in value.

Yes you are right but I think you’ve found a bug with my cack handed description of my logic, not with the logic itself! We value things highly by assigning them symbols with low values, so a symbol with a postfix modifier that gives it a slightly lower value means we value it higher! Or something :)

[deleted]

Re: eBay pays $3M fine in blogger harassment case

#99

Post by squokko »

low_tech_love wrote: post #34

The filings said the couple had been left "emotionally, psychologically, and physically" terrorised. I always find it interesting that, when people sue other people/companies for some kind of harassment, they have to claim something like this. Shouldn’t it be obvious? Like, they got weird stuff by mail and got stalked. That should be enough? What if they didn’t actually got scared, what if they laughed at it? They we…

Whether it should or not is a matter of opinion, but the law makes a distinction based on the state of motives of the perpetrator, and the consequences of their actions. Murder has a more severe punishment than attempted murder, and premeditated murder has a more severe punishment than spur-of-the-moment murder.
Post reply on HN