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

It's not a crime if we do it with an app

pluralistic.net

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

181–190 of 640 posts

Re: It's not a crime if we do it with an app

#181

Post by hermannj314 »

gruez wrote: post #120
hermannj314 wrote: post #32

This is the way our world works. If you steal a potato, you will be arrested immediately and the case will be resolved in a few weeks or months. If you illegally fix the price of potatoes and steal billions from the market, you will be allowed to operate for years in the open while a lengthy civil procedure eventually may ask you to give 1 or 2% of what you stole back in fines. Don't blame the potato theives or potat…

>while a lengthy civil procedure eventually may ask you to give 1 or 2% of what you stole back in fines. Examples? Usually when this argument is trotted out, there's two factors not mentioned: the amount "stolen" is the amount transacted (ie. total potato sold, rather than the additional profit made), or that the government's case is shaky and the settlement reflected that.

Big banks role in 2008 financial crisis. Facebook fines from FTC regarding user privacy.

But your point shows the asymmetry in the system. Most thieves don't get to argue costs of goods stolen vs. sticker price of goods stolen and then get to reach a cushy settlement because the government is scared of losing a protracted battle.

Re: It's not a crime if we do it with an app

#182

Post by arcbyte »

dartos wrote: post #175
gruez wrote: post #157

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>Contrast that to how individuals get the hammer put down on them by the justice system if they so much as fart in the wrong room. The lesson from the last 50 years should be: If you want to commit a crime and get away with it, do it as a corporation. That's because most crimes "individuals" do are straightforwardly illegal and easy to prosecute, whereas the "crime if a corporation does it" are not. It's not any diff…

> That's because most crimes "individuals" do are straightforwardly illegal and easy to prosecute, whereas the "crime if a corporation does it" are not Maybe that’s something that should be adjusted by a legislative body. Crimes are only “easy” or “difficult” to prosecute because of the laws as they’re written.

Most crimes done by individuals are intentional. That is most often not the case with corporations. Intentionality is an important requirement in most crimes.

That doest mean that there isn't plenty of room for more centralized civil protections against negligence and recklessness.

Re: It's not a crime if we do it with an app

#184

Post by dclowd9901 »

layer8 wrote: post #112
__MatrixMan__ wrote: post #77

Earlier quoted context omitted.

We need to start seizing IP into the public domain and sending shareholders to jail when their companies misbehave. I'm on the hook if my dog bites somebody, it should be no different if the role of my dog is played by a company. Monetary risk is not a real enough risk.

While I’m sympathetic to the sentiment, I don’t see how “sending shareholders to jail” could possibly work, given how many people own shares. It’s like your dog would be collectively owned by a million people. Maybe you mean the board?

A charitable reading of that would be shareholders who have enough sway to push corporate action. Boards, really.

Re: It's not a crime if we do it with an app

#185

Post by wat10000 »

ta1243 wrote: post #11
tripplyons wrote: post #3

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What was illegal about Neflix, YouTube, and Tesla at first?

Youtube came to fame because of sharing copyrighted material without permission of the copyright holders. Still does. With Tesla, I've no idea if there are laws preventing direct to customer selling, the "land of the free" has a lot of laws preventing freedom.

Many states have laws preventing direct to customer selling. Tesla works around this by just not selling in those states. If you live in one of those states and want to buy a Tesla, you pick it up in a neighboring state that does allow direct sales. Or these days they may have a better workaround where the car is officially purchased elsewhere but you don’t have to physically travel there. This is totally above-board since states are not allowed to regulate interstate commerce, so state laws against direct sales necessarily can only apply within the state.

Re: It's not a crime if we do it with an app

#186

Post by RobotToaster »

layer8 wrote: post #112
__MatrixMan__ wrote: post #77

Earlier quoted context omitted.

We need to start seizing IP into the public domain and sending shareholders to jail when their companies misbehave. I'm on the hook if my dog bites somebody, it should be no different if the role of my dog is played by a company. Monetary risk is not a real enough risk.

While I’m sympathetic to the sentiment, I don’t see how “sending shareholders to jail” could possibly work, given how many people own shares. It’s like your dog would be collectively owned by a million people. Maybe you mean the board?

To continue the analogy, if a dog is aggressive and hurts people it gets put down, why not put down the corporation?

Re: It's not a crime if we do it with an app

#187

Post by amazingamazing »

Pooge wrote: post #172
gruez wrote: post #163

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>The author claims, that these companies raise prices more than inflation based cost increases in production would allow for. That's just supply and demand? People get mad that when there's an oil shortage, that oil companies raise prices above the cost of production, but they're happy to see oil companies' margin collapse when there's an oil glut.

> People get mad that when there's an oil shortage, that oil companies raise prices above the cost of production It's a bit different when they all (i.e. cartel) agree to keep the same price even after the shock has passed, isn't it?

if there's clear evidence to this, it's illegal

Re: It's not a crime if we do it with an app

#188

Post by SpicyLemonZest »

wat10000 wrote: post #132
hermannj314 wrote: post #32

This is the way our world works. If you steal a potato, you will be arrested immediately and the case will be resolved in a few weeks or months. If you illegally fix the price of potatoes and steal billions from the market, you will be allowed to operate for years in the open while a lengthy civil procedure eventually may ask you to give 1 or 2% of what you stole back in fines. Don't blame the potato theives or potat…

A real world example: wage theft in the US is bigger than all other forms of theft combined. How often do you hear about it? We hear endlessly about shoplifting rings and lax enforcement by lefty prosecutors. When was the last time you saw coverage of workers not being paid what they’re owed? When was the last time somebody went to jail for not paying their workers what they’re owed?

I routinely see coverage of workers not being paid what they’re owed.

People do sometimes go to jail for not paying workers what they’re owed (https://kfoxtv.com/amp/news/local/el-paso-contractor-jailed-...), but this article illustrates pretty clearly why you don’t hear more about it. Advocacy orgs aren’t going to brag about some random contractor or McDonalds supervisor going to jail, and the corporate fat cats they could brag about rarely commit wage theft themselves.

Re: It's not a crime if we do it with an app

#189

Post by notTooFarGone »

layer8 wrote: post #112
__MatrixMan__ wrote: post #77

Earlier quoted context omitted.

We need to start seizing IP into the public domain and sending shareholders to jail when their companies misbehave. I'm on the hook if my dog bites somebody, it should be no different if the role of my dog is played by a company. Monetary risk is not a real enough risk.

While I’m sympathetic to the sentiment, I don’t see how “sending shareholders to jail” could possibly work, given how many people own shares. It’s like your dog would be collectively owned by a million people. Maybe you mean the board?

"Shareholder" are not people who own a stock in robin hood.

It's large players with board positions who reap the benefits and turn a blind eye to blatant corruption.

Re: It's not a crime if we do it with an app

#190

Post by miohtama »

layer8 wrote: post #112
__MatrixMan__ wrote: post #77

Earlier quoted context omitted.

We need to start seizing IP into the public domain and sending shareholders to jail when their companies misbehave. I'm on the hook if my dog bites somebody, it should be no different if the role of my dog is played by a company. Monetary risk is not a real enough risk.

While I’m sympathetic to the sentiment, I don’t see how “sending shareholders to jail” could possibly work, given how many people own shares. It’s like your dog would be collectively owned by a million people. Maybe you mean the board?

There is no room for million people in any jail system on the planet.

What should happen is to send the share price to zero or give to the government.

This was e.g. done with 2008 financial crisis for Fannie Mae and it had been paying dividends to the US citizens since then.

However there exists discussion whether this was a good thing in the end.

Post reply on HN