4 ms·

> I had to be made an example of as a warning to all IT people who were intending to work in similar companies. That's scary. I'm supposed to police my employ

> I had to be made an example of as a warning to all IT people who were intending to work in similar companies. That's scary. I'm supposed to police my employers actions? To some extent I can understand, but that puts a lot of IT people in awkward positions. Do Dropbox employees need to worry that infringing content is being taken down fast enough, lest the face prosecution? I didn't follow Megaupload too closely, so I hope I'm blowing this out of proportion...

cm3 10y ago
> Do Dropbox employees need to worry that infringing content is being taken down fast enough, lest the face prosecution? Not as long a Dropbox doesn't offend the wrong people.
- TobbenTM 10y ago
  Not as long Condoleezza Rice is on the board.
  - cm3 10y ago
    Good point.
  - letitleak 10y ago
    If saying an employee acted without authorization and/or tampering with the papertrail will save a few million in fines then you better hope no one like that is on your board. But your stock options will be safe.. though you probably wont be entitled to them.
  - 2close4comfort 10y ago
    This is why Google is on such good terms with the State Dept, friends in high places will ensure that no matter what happens you will not run into issues of "law".
yardie 10y ago
Not with Condi Rice on the board. I'm sure her appointment was strategic, but I've refused to use their services since then. My principles don't allow it.
- duncan_bayne 10y ago
  Curious: What about Rice prevents you from using their services? (Non-American here, so please excuse what may seem like a trivial question).
  - coldtea 10y ago
    Perhaps her war mongering?
  - yardie 10y ago
    She was Secretary of the State Department and National Security Advisor during GWB's presidency. It was her advocacy for the Iraq War and her support of CIA torture that I have a problem with. She's tried to downplay her role in it but moron wouldn't.
  - us0r 10y ago
    She advocates NSA warrantless surveillance. http://www.drop-dropbox.com/surveillance.html http://www.drop-dropbox.com/surveillance.html
pessimizer 10y ago
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Milgram_experiment https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Milgram_experiment https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Little_Eichmanns https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Little_Eichmanns Not that I disagree with what Megaupload was, but "they paid me to help, and I didn't ask any questions" is about the worst excuse in the world. edit: to be super-clear, if you're participating in Megaupload, you're participating in Megaupload. It isn't just the CEO who is taking a stand against copyright (or for private communication, or whatever), you are too. Also, you should be prepared that people generally aren't sympathetic to moral stances that are personally lucrative, especially at the expense of others. This is because people lie for money.
orbitingpluto 10y ago
I've worked for an employer that has wanted me to do illegal things on their behalf w.r.t. payroll 'tweaking'. Refusal to do these things was causing lots of friction and so I did the prudent thing and quit. I've touched the code base that does payroll (doing legal unrelated tweaks). It is still probably being used to steal from their own employees. Am I to expect a knock on the door?
curun1r 10y ago
I'd imagine the Napster criteria of "substantial non-infringing use" would be used to differentiate between Dropbox and Megaupload, so I doubt either the company or its employees would have a problem on that front. But there are lots of companies that break the law so blatantly that their employees cannot claim to be ignorant. For instance, if I were an employee of Uber, I would be very careful traveling and would take every opportunity to hide the identity of my employer, especially if I were going some place where Uber was particularly irreverent of the local laws when trying to enter the market.

cm3 10y ago

> Do Dropbox employees need to worry that infringing content is being taken down fast enough, lest the face prosecution? Not as long a Dropbox doesn't offend the wrong people.

TobbenTM 10y ago
Not as long Condoleezza Rice is on the board.
- cm3 10y ago
  Good point.
- letitleak 10y ago
  If saying an employee acted without authorization and/or tampering with the papertrail will save a few million in fines then you better hope no one like that is on your board. But your stock options will be safe.. though you probably wont be entitled to them.
- 2close4comfort 10y ago
  This is why Google is on such good terms with the State Dept, friends in high places will ensure that no matter what happens you will not run into issues of "law".

yardie 10y ago

Not with Condi Rice on the board. I'm sure her appointment was strategic, but I've refused to use their services since then. My principles don't allow it.

duncan_bayne 10y ago
Curious: What about Rice prevents you from using their services? (Non-American here, so please excuse what may seem like a trivial question).
- coldtea 10y ago
  Perhaps her war mongering?
- yardie 10y ago
  She was Secretary of the State Department and National Security Advisor during GWB's presidency. It was her advocacy for the Iraq War and her support of CIA torture that I have a problem with. She's tried to downplay her role in it but moron wouldn't.
- us0r 10y ago
  She advocates NSA warrantless surveillance. http://www.drop-dropbox.com/surveillance.html http://www.drop-dropbox.com/surveillance.html

pessimizer 10y ago

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Milgram_experiment https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Milgram_experiment https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Little_Eichmanns https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Little_Eichmanns Not that I disagree with what Megaupload was, but "they paid me to help, and I didn't ask any questions" is about the worst excuse in the world. edit: to be super-clear, if you're participating in Megaupload, you're participating in Megaupload. It isn't just the CEO who is taking a stand against copyright (or for private communication, or whatever), you are too. Also, you should be prepared that people generally aren't sympathetic to moral stances that are personally lucrative, especially at the expense of others. This is because people lie for money.

orbitingpluto 10y ago

I've worked for an employer that has wanted me to do illegal things on their behalf w.r.t. payroll 'tweaking'. Refusal to do these things was causing lots of friction and so I did the prudent thing and quit. I've touched the code base that does payroll (doing legal unrelated tweaks). It is still probably being used to steal from their own employees. Am I to expect a knock on the door?

curun1r 10y ago

I'd imagine the Napster criteria of "substantial non-infringing use" would be used to differentiate between Dropbox and Megaupload, so I doubt either the company or its employees would have a problem on that front. But there are lots of companies that break the law so blatantly that their employees cannot claim to be ignorant. For instance, if I were an employee of Uber, I would be very careful traveling and would take every opportunity to hide the identity of my employer, especially if I were going some place where Uber was particularly irreverent of the local laws when trying to enter the market.