3 ms·
The core problem seems to be false advertising. It would be great for the author to take the company to small claims court and try to address that. However, a
by heliodor 7y ago
The core problem seems to be false advertising. It would be great for the author to take the company to small claims court and try to address that.
However, a class-action lawsuit to address all the wronged people would probably just bankrupt the company. The hurt people would not receive restitution. The founders would not receive any punishment. They would just lose the easy stream of future income they currently enjoy. Stopping a bad company from doing further harm is worthwhile though.
Calling out is exactly what's needed here. Our society and technology are at a point where it is easy for bad actors to cause damage, relocate, and repeat. Exposing them and shutting down their future opportunities is exactly what's necessary. Back in the days of small villages, everyone knew everyone's reputation and that provided a barrier against fraud. Unfortunately, our current legal framework prevents any company from offering a reputation platform because they would get sued out of existence with libel claims.
Investors aren't very interested in the morality (or even legal technicalities) of the products in which they invest, as long as they make some money on their investments. Calling the founder out will slow her down in any future grey-zone endeavors but won't stop her completely.
- robocat 7y ago> Back in the days of small villages, everyone knew everyone's reputation and that provided a barrier against fraud. Surely there were also small villages where most commit fraud too? "Cheat and Grudger are an ESS" in The Selfish Gene.