Google cuts mystery check to US in bid to sidestep jury trial
1–10 of 112 posts
Re: Google cuts mystery check to US in bid to sidestep jury trial
#2In most parts of the world, this would be recognized as bribery.
Re: Google cuts mystery check to US in bid to sidestep jury trial
#3In most parts of the world, this would be recognized as bribery.
It's legal in the US when a lobbyist is involved and too big to jail.
Corporate attitude: Just do the risk management of paying "parking tickets" vs. "buying a parking permit".
"Do no evil"
Re: Google cuts mystery check to US in bid to sidestep jury trial
#4> Google asserted that its check, which it said covered its alleged overcharges for online ads, allows it to sidestep a jury trial whether or not the government takes it.
wtf. Since when does cutting a cheque allow you to directly dictate how legal process works?
Instead of paying a speeding fine this is like going to the judge and saying here is 100 bucks to pretend the speed limit is 10 mph higher and then we hold the trial under those conditions.
Gotta admire the balls on the google lawyers though.
Re: Google cuts mystery check to US in bid to sidestep jury trial
#5Big companies can just pay money to make antitrust cases go away?!?
Re: Google cuts mystery check to US in bid to sidestep jury trial
#6For everyone who doesn't understand what's going on: Google has written a check that they claim covers the monetary damages involved in the case, and has conceded that amount. That would take damages off the table for this case. With no monetary damages, Google thinks that the state has no right to demand a jury trial.
They have also said in the article that the amount that Google claims the DOJ can prove is less than $1 million, so there's a chance this is a very small check from Google's perspective.
Polling the jury pool is not an uncommon practice in high-stakes trials, and I assume that Google has run a poll of the jury pool and found them hostile enough that they are willing to concede to 7-8 figures to avoid a jury getting involved in the decision whether to break Google up.
Re: Google cuts mystery check to US in bid to sidestep jury trial
#7In most parts of the world, this would be recognized as bribery.
This isn't a bribe, and there's no lobbying. This is a sort of weird form of "tactical retreat" in the lawsuit. By conceding on the damages the government is demanding (or at least the ones Google thinks the DOJ can prove), Google is taking the issue of damages off the table, and they believe that this takes the demand for a jury trial off the table. They are taking the loss to avoid having a jury trial.
Re: Google cuts mystery check to US in bid to sidestep jury trial
#8Don't be evil
Re: Google cuts mystery check to US in bid to sidestep jury trial
#9In most parts of the world, this would be recognized as bribery.
This isn't a bribe, and there's no lobbying. This is a sort of weird form of "tactical retreat" in the lawsuit. By conceding on the damages the government is demanding (or at least the ones Google thinks the DOJ can prove), Google is taking the issue of damages off the table, and they believe that this takes the demand for a jury trial off the table. They are taking the loss to avoid having a jury trial.
Your comment did not in any way refute the claim that this would be considered a bribe in other countries. It's an exchange of money for a favorable (to them) change in the legal process, which seems like a reasonable definition to me.
Re: Google cuts mystery check to US in bid to sidestep jury trial
#10For everyone who doesn't understand what's going on: Google has written a check that they claim covers the monetary damages involved in the case, and has conceded that amount. That would take damages off the table for this case. With no monetary damages, Google thinks that the state has no right to demand a jury trial. They have also said in the article that the amount that Google claims the DOJ can prove is less tha…
> Another legal scholar, Herbert Hovenkamp of the University of Pennsylvania’s law school, called Google's move "smart" in a post on X. “Juries are bad at deciding technical cases, and further they do not have the authority to order a breakup,” he wrote.
Would a jury have the authority to break Google up?