3 ms·

>that must be some weird/interesting part of US law. Indeed. We see time and time again that corporations can get away with almost anything they want without f

>that must be some weird/interesting part of US law. Indeed. We see time and time again that corporations can get away with almost anything they want without facing any real consequence compared to individuals. What part of US law is protecting these corporations and the people involved when they flagrantly break the law? It's sickening.

gruez 6y ago
>We see time and time again that corporations can get away with almost anything they want without facing any real consequence compared to individuals. ...except that corporations are literally just groups of people, the person who perpetrated the act (Zaidi) pled guilty to hacking and is awaiting sentencing?
- thatguy0900 6y ago
  And all the other people who were present and knew what was going on?
  - gruez 6y ago
    IANAL, but in the US at least there isn't any obligation to stop or report any crime you witnessed[1]. As for the other people in the company that used his credentials to access the competitors site, it's possible to prosecute them, but you'll have to prove intent. That might be tricky to prove because the defense can argue that they didn't intend to hack the site, because they thought Zaidi was properly authorized to use the site. [1] There are some exceptions, eg. if you're a teacher and you learn about child abuse
    - nieve 6y ago
      According to the articles other employees logged in with what they knew were not legitimately obtained and pretty clearly committed CFAA violations that have gotten serious punishment before. Moreover they induced Zaidi to commit the offenses he's been prosecuted for _and_ co-ordinated a set of employees to access the victim's network _and_ showed that off internally. How is that not criminal conspiracy unless it doesn't count against Ticketmaster if they just say the magic words that they didn't know?
- aidenn0 6y ago
  Really? Zaidi did all this by himself? Last time I checked "I was just following orders" isn't a valid defense for felonies.
ModernMech 6y ago
> What part of US law is protecting these corporations and the people involved when they flagrantly break the law? Er.... this is entirely the point of the law in the US -- to protect corporate interests. Who do you think are writing the laws? It's not some weird edge case or quirk in the system. Protecting and furthering corporate interests is the system. As always, the purpose of the system is what it does.

gruez 6y ago

>We see time and time again that corporations can get away with almost anything they want without facing any real consequence compared to individuals. ...except that corporations are literally just groups of people, the person who perpetrated the act (Zaidi) pled guilty to hacking and is awaiting sentencing?

thatguy0900 6y ago
And all the other people who were present and knew what was going on?
- gruez 6y ago
  IANAL, but in the US at least there isn't any obligation to stop or report any crime you witnessed[1]. As for the other people in the company that used his credentials to access the competitors site, it's possible to prosecute them, but you'll have to prove intent. That might be tricky to prove because the defense can argue that they didn't intend to hack the site, because they thought Zaidi was properly authorized to use the site. [1] There are some exceptions, eg. if you're a teacher and you learn about child abuse
  - nieve 6y ago
    According to the articles other employees logged in with what they knew were not legitimately obtained and pretty clearly committed CFAA violations that have gotten serious punishment before. Moreover they induced Zaidi to commit the offenses he's been prosecuted for _and_ co-ordinated a set of employees to access the victim's network _and_ showed that off internally. How is that not criminal conspiracy unless it doesn't count against Ticketmaster if they just say the magic words that they didn't know?
aidenn0 6y ago
Really? Zaidi did all this by himself? Last time I checked "I was just following orders" isn't a valid defense for felonies.

ModernMech 6y ago

> What part of US law is protecting these corporations and the people involved when they flagrantly break the law? Er.... this is entirely the point of the law in the US -- to protect corporate interests. Who do you think are writing the laws? It's not some weird edge case or quirk in the system. Protecting and furthering corporate interests is the system. As always, the purpose of the system is what it does.