3 ms·
1. Netflix itself did nothing wrong - it's lawful for a company to use shitty expensive useless products. On the other hand, if a company officer takes bribes t
by PeterisP 6y ago
1. Netflix itself did nothing wrong - it's lawful for a company to use shitty expensive useless products. On the other hand, if a company officer takes bribes to act against the interests of their employer, they're breaching their duty of care towards the employer and defrauding them, and that is a felony. I'm not certain about the guilt of the bribing company, that might depend on the exact details and where it happens/which law applies.
2. "Standard" in-person fraud is prosecuted by the states, but fraud over mail or wires is a federal crime, so if any long-distance communications were involved then the federal justice system can (also) get involved.
- einpoklum 6y ago> breachingtheir duty of care towards the employer and defrauding them That's the part that sounds a bit strange to me. I mean, breach of duty is one thing, and fraud is a second thing. But I guess that's how fraud is defined in US criminal law. > 2. "Standard" in-person fraud is prosecuted by the states, but fraud over mail or wires is a federal crime, so if any long-distance communications were involved then the federal justice system can (also) get involved. Well, the relations between a company and its officer are in-person, aren't they? Or is it the case that if I defraud you and during that time call your phone once, I can be prosecuted for "wire fraud"?
- PeterisP 6y agoThe definition is "the use of an interstate wire communication to further the scheme". Email and phone qualifies, and it does not need to play a crucial role in the scheme to defraud, it only needs to be made in order to advance the scheme somehow; a single email exchange about the kickbacks with a vendor sales representative in another state might be sufficient push it from "normal" fraud to wire fraud.