3 ms·
Do you consider: a) Being gifted a TV by a friend b) Someone telling you they'll help you steal a TV from your friend's house To be the same thing? Because o
by joecot 6y ago
Do you consider:
a) Being gifted a TV by a friend
b) Someone telling you they'll help you steal a TV from your friend's house
To be the same thing? Because one involves a perfectly reasonable and legal promise, and one does not. If you can't tell the difference, remind me not to invite you over.
- otterley 6y agoAn undelivered gift is not a contract. This is covered in first-year contract law.
- joecot 6y agoWhile that may be the case, an undelivered gift is still worlds different than an undelivered bribe.
- otterley 6y agoI'm not sure what your point is.
- joecot 6y agoThat nickff's comment asked whether both a promise of a bonus and a promise of a bribe would be equally considered a "promise of compensation"? That's who I was replying to. Whether or not a promise of a gift is a legally binding contract, there's a vast difference between a promise of a gift and a promise of a bribe.
- otterley 6y agoI guess my question is, even if they are different, why is that difference material for the purpose of the conversation?
- joecot 6y agoIf a company had a pen tester offer bribes to people, and those employees accept bribes, the pen test was indeed failed and those employees should be rightfully reprimanded. That's good security. If a company had a pen tester send what appears to be a perfectly legitimate message to employees offering them a company bonus for responding (during a worldwide pandemic where everyone is short on money), and then says it was a pen test and they've failed, that company is awful and heartless. There might not be a legal case against them, but the company is still deserving of public scorn and outrage.
- otterley 6y agoPut yourself on the other side. If their employees are failing this test when they send such messages themselves, the company cannot feel comfortable that they are secure if a malicious actor sends such messages to their staff. It's a case of bad vs. worse. There are no winners here.
- joecot 6y agoIt's a message from a valid internal email address. If a company's own email servers can't tell the difference between valid internal mail and external phishing, that's the company's problem, not the employees. If the company's email is hacked so that a hacker can send valid emails from a legitimate internal email address, that's the company's problem, not the employees. Nothing of value was learned by this test, besides the disdain GoDaddy has for their own employees. If I put myself on the other side, I'd stop producing gross sexist ads, stop supporting overreaching internet legislation, and stop treating my employees like garbage.
- gamblor956 6y agoFor someone who is not a lawyer, you're making some strong statements about the legal aspects of this situation. Yes, it's true that an undelivered gift is not a contract...but you seem to have forgotten (or possibly never learned) about promissory estoppel. If the giftee was told of the gift and reasonably acted upon the expectation of the gift, then the gifter could very well be obligated to actually deliver the gift. This is covered in first-year contract law. There are indeed a great number of cases on this point in which the gifter was required to provide the gift. Also, generally employee bonuses are considered compensation for labor, not gifts. Labor laws trump contract laws. If a company tells an employee that they are getting extra compensation through an official means of communication (like an internal email), they may very well be bound to that, even if it turns out the email was just a phishing test sent by the IT department. You do not fuck with the Labor Board.
- otterley 6y agoYou're totally right about promissory estoppel (I updated my other comments about that). It's been awhile since I was in 1L :). Again, nothing I say should be construed as legal advice. Appreciate the feedback.