4 ms·
Fines don't have to be toothless.
by ska 7y ago
Fines don't have to be toothless.
- acdha 7y agoThis is technically true but the odds of a fine being levied which is high enough to register on huge companies like this is exceedingly low, especially since everyone involved in that decision could walk away from a bankruptcy and still be fabulously rich. Punishing shareholders has a lot of collateral damage but personal liability has almost none.
- warent 7y agoIt depends on the perspective. Imagine an FCC shopping page for businesses that says something like: "Gain ability to sell customer location data for a year: $10,000,000" "Fine" is a euphemism for market price. If the profits outweigh the fines and the poor PR can be controlled in a timely manner, then they'll do it every time.
- cnasc 7y agoWhat about an FCC shopping page that says the price is “throw one scapegoat to the wolves”?
- ska 7y agoMarkets prices work the other way too; if fines are at least perceived to be more expensive than any benefit you'll see, they are a good disincentive.
- kortilla 7y agoThen you just increase the fines. That’s so much more trivial than throwing people into an already overcrowded prison system and destroying their life.
- craftinator 7y agoI think fines should act against the shareholders who let it happen! FCC forces more shares and acquires them, decreasing shareholder value, which is the gold standard of publicly traded companies.
- dudus 7y agoAnd they must be worse for repeat offenses.