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

Netflix Executive Sentenced to 30 Months for 700K Bribes, Kickbacks from Vendors

justice.gov

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

201–210 of 255 posts

Re: Netflix Executive Sentenced to 30 Months for 700K Bribes, Kickbacks from Vendors

#201

Post by handrous »

PragmaticPulp wrote: post #13

Every time this story comes up, the comments are filled with people proclaiming that kickbacks like this are totally normal and very common. I can't tell how much of it is random people projecting their cynicism onto the business world, or if it's people who have been part of bribery/kickback schemes themselves trying to normalize the behavior online. Either way, cases like this should make it clear that the behavior…

Those of us not in elite circles have a little trouble getting worked up over the difference between something that looks like it's scummy, immoral cheating, but is legal, or the same, but illegal.

Same played out with the college entrance scandal. "Bribery is great and we love it a bunch—unless you do it wrong because you're not rich enough to do it right, then it's a big ol' no-no" is the message a great many received from that one.

Re: Netflix Executive Sentenced to 30 Months for 700K Bribes, Kickbacks from Vendors

#202

Post by smsm42 »

vishnugupta wrote: post #114
PragmaticPulp wrote: post #13

Every time this story comes up, the comments are filled with people proclaiming that kickbacks like this are totally normal and very common. I can't tell how much of it is random people projecting their cynicism onto the business world, or if it's people who have been part of bribery/kickback schemes themselves trying to normalize the behavior online. Either way, cases like this should make it clear that the behavior…

I know of people who AWS fully sponsored, including business class intercontinental travel, to attend re:Invent which is essentially a week long holiday party, by virtue of AWS bill. Every vendor has marketing budget and a decent portion of it goes to keeping their point people at clients happy. You can call it kick back or whatever, it’s a matter of semantics. So yes it is normal. And no it’s neither cynical and nor…

Things like that - e.g. conferences, paid travel, etc - are common. But I think it's different from a manager charging kickbacks for awarding an IT contract, and on only by pure semantic.

Re: Netflix Executive Sentenced to 30 Months for 700K Bribes, Kickbacks from Vendors

#203

Post by apex3stoker »

vishnugupta wrote: post #114
PragmaticPulp wrote: post #13

Every time this story comes up, the comments are filled with people proclaiming that kickbacks like this are totally normal and very common. I can't tell how much of it is random people projecting their cynicism onto the business world, or if it's people who have been part of bribery/kickback schemes themselves trying to normalize the behavior online. Either way, cases like this should make it clear that the behavior…

I know of people who AWS fully sponsored, including business class intercontinental travel, to attend re:Invent which is essentially a week long holiday party, by virtue of AWS bill. Every vendor has marketing budget and a decent portion of it goes to keeping their point people at clients happy. You can call it kick back or whatever, it’s a matter of semantics. So yes it is normal. And no it’s neither cynical and nor…

I think in the UK they have laws which basically say that bribery is defined by employers. It is bribery if employers don't approve the payments/gifts as part of the job. I think it is similar in the US. People in your examples probably got the approval, but this Netflix executive definitely didn't according to the article.

Re: Netflix Executive Sentenced to 30 Months for 700K Bribes, Kickbacks from Vendors

#204

Post by cheriot »

PragmaticPulp wrote: post #130
vishnugupta wrote: post #114

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I know of people who AWS fully sponsored, including business class intercontinental travel, to attend re:Invent which is essentially a week long holiday party, by virtue of AWS bill. Every vendor has marketing budget and a decent portion of it goes to keeping their point people at clients happy. You can call it kick back or whatever, it’s a matter of semantics. So yes it is normal. And no it’s neither cynical and nor…

> I know of people who AWS fully sponsored, including business class intercontinental travel, to attend re:Invent which is essentially a week long holiday party, by virtue of AWS bill. Flying people to an AWS conference seems entirely different than funneling money into a single person's bank account. Yes, I know these conferences have a party-like atmosphere, but it's not done surreptitiously and it's not siphoning…

Pharmaceutical companies used all inclusive "conferences" to influence doctors to prescribe more opioids. It was effective enough to be banned.

> Accepting a free trip to a drug-company-sponsored conference guided doctors to write more prescriptions of the company’s drugs, a spike of 80 to 190 percent

https://www.drugwatch.com/news/2012/01/18/pharmaceutical-com...

America is generally good about limiting things to legal graft. I can't offer an elected official money in exchange for a vote, but I can donate millions to entities controlled by the elected officials that are my "friends" and make sure they know about it.

Re: Netflix Executive Sentenced to 30 Months for 700K Bribes, Kickbacks from Vendors

#205

Post by rrrrrrrrrrrryan »

moltar wrote: post #194
moralestapia wrote: post #189

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It is VERY different, come on. It's an open conference offered by the largest player in the space vs. a shady deal between a supplier and ONE person of another company, without its employers consent, on top of that.

It’s different in facts, but it’s not different in spirit. Did you know that pharma sales reps take out doctors to play golf all expenses paid, plus fancy restaurant lunch in the end? Is that different? How about a lobbyist donating money to a political party? Is that different? Google the law of reciprocity. It’s human nature.

The main difference here is the scale.

"Let us take you on a $2000 vacation" vs. "Let us take you on a $700,000 vacation." One is objectively ridiculous - this is the difference.

Re: Netflix Executive Sentenced to 30 Months for 700K Bribes, Kickbacks from Vendors

#206

Post by SippinLean »

dheera wrote: post #71
barcoder wrote: post #10

Note this is the former IT exec from 2014. These type of trials take a while to complete

So did they hold him in prison from 2014 to 2021? What did he do during those years? There should be some law about time waiting for trial counting toward the sentence, which would also incentivize judges to work more quickly.

He was indicted in 2018 and released on bail

https://www.justice.gov/usao-ndca/pr/former-netflix-inc-vp-c...

Re: Netflix Executive Sentenced to 30 Months for 700K Bribes, Kickbacks from Vendors

#207

Post by FooBarBizBazz »

PragmaticPulp wrote: post #13

Every time this story comes up, the comments are filled with people proclaiming that kickbacks like this are totally normal and very common. I can't tell how much of it is random people projecting their cynicism onto the business world, or if it's people who have been part of bribery/kickback schemes themselves trying to normalize the behavior online. Either way, cases like this should make it clear that the behavior…

The first time I heard someone talk about a "commission" in this context, I was totally confused -- "I thought salespeople got commissions, not customers?" -- until it all snapped into focus and I was like: "Oh." And from the way they talked, this was normal for B2B sales? So then I look at some decisions that have been made in companies where I've worked, and I wonder...

Re: Netflix Executive Sentenced to 30 Months for 700K Bribes, Kickbacks from Vendors

#208

Post by horsawlarway »

___q wrote: post #200
horsawlarway wrote: post #175

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> "Happy birthday" is public domain Only after 2016. Before that you would have been on the hook for ~$700 per performance to warner media group. Admittedly, in most "Private" settings, you'd be fine. The most common place to get flagged was in a restaurant where the waiters sing to you. > you don't need to report things you buy online on your taxes Ooof, I got some bad news for you, buddy. You ABSOLUTELY DO need to…

> Only after 2016. Which it is right now, so "happy birthday" is public domain. > You ABSOLUTELY DO need to report any online purchase that does not charge you sales tax The original post didn't say "that do not charge tax." Yes you must pay taxes where applicable, like all purchases.

He asked which laws he might have unintentionally broken. Unless he's an incredibly literate 6 year old... I suspect he's old enough to have sung happy birthday before 2016, which would have been breaking the law.

The original post also didn't specify that you picked an online vendor that's calculating this tax for you... And in some places, you're still supposed to be reporting it! Fun times!

Re: Netflix Executive Sentenced to 30 Months for 700K Bribes, Kickbacks from Vendors

#209

Post by bumby »

wombatpm wrote: post #99
bumby wrote: post #63

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I had to look that up because I’m not familiar with the story, but it seems illegal in most other states. This Netflix case, by contrast, is federal. Still makes the Gov. actions seem sketchy

Florida politics is sketchy be definition as they are an outgrowth of representing 'Florida Man'

You know “Florida Man” is really just an outcome of Florida criminal records being open and creating an availability bias, right?

If other states had open records, there’d be much more fodder to create a “Wisconsin Man,” “California Man” etc.

Re: Netflix Executive Sentenced to 30 Months for 700K Bribes, Kickbacks from Vendors

#210

Post by kjreact »

rrrrrrrrrrrryan wrote: post #205
moltar wrote: post #194

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It’s different in facts, but it’s not different in spirit. Did you know that pharma sales reps take out doctors to play golf all expenses paid, plus fancy restaurant lunch in the end? Is that different? How about a lobbyist donating money to a political party? Is that different? Google the law of reciprocity. It’s human nature.

The main difference here is the scale. "Let us take you on a $2000 vacation" vs. "Let us take you on a $700,000 vacation." One is objectively ridiculous - this is the difference.

So what you’re saying is taking a smaller bribe is okay? Just as long as it’s not a “ridiculous” bribe…
Post reply on HN