7 ms·

> The fact that they were both unpunished for finding loopholes in employment law Why should companies or people be punished for finding and using loopholes? B

> The fact that they were both unpunished for finding loopholes in employment law Why should companies or people be punished for finding and using loopholes? By definition, loopholes are perfectly legal. They may be against the spirit of the law, but they are still legal.

Retric 5y ago
Loopholes are legal in theory but not necessarily in practice. They could have just as easily ruled that the use of a private truck requires compensation on top of pay.
- bennysomething 5y ago
  If you declare loop holes some how illegal you introduce arbitrary judgement.
  - guipsp 5y ago
    All judgement is arbitrary
  - Retric 5y ago
    Often they are exploring bugs in the legal system which unsurprisingly give arbitrary output when litigated.
    - deleted 5y ago
      [deleted]
  - AussieWog93 5y ago
    For what it's worth, etymology of the word "arbitrary": late Middle English (in the sense ‘dependent on one's will or pleasure, discretionary’): from Latin arbitrarius, from arbiter ‘judge, supreme ruler’, perhaps influenced by French arbitraire . Literally comes from the Latin word for a judge!
AussieWog93 5y ago
>Why should companies or people be punished for finding and using loopholes? You answered it yourself. They're against the spirit of the law. In any other circumstance where rules or obligations are enforced, exploiting loopholes is completely unacceptable behaviour. (To clarify, I'm not arguing that the judge made the wrong decision in this particular case. Instead, I don't think this type of behaviour should be tolerated by the system at all.)
- mytailorisrich 5y ago
  In a system based on the rule of law the only way to make people stop using loopholes is to close them by changing the law. People are entitled to do what's in their best interest by staying within the law to the limit. If the issue is one of interpretation of the law then courts are there to decide.
  - gilrain 5y ago
    This is entirely opposite of how our courts are designed and obliged to work. Please educate yourself.
    - lotsofpulp 5y ago
      How does this lead to anything other than the justice system being able to selectively target entities?
      - myfavoritedog 5y ago
- chii 5y ago
  > They're against the spirit of the law. and if you're against the spirit, but find a loophole? you do not technically break the law, and achieve your objectives. The law maker is at fault, if there are loop holes.
AniseAbyss 5y ago
Because we live in a society. Illegals sub contracting delivery vans, delivery drivers using their kids as free labor. The whole industry is screwed. And I'm a hypocrite because I order stuff online as well.
lenkite 5y ago
> By definition, loopholes are perfectly legal. They may be against the spirit of the law, but they are still legal As long as you can bribe - oops sorry I meant donate to your local politician(s) to keep these 'perfectly legal' laws intact...
lordnacho 5y ago
It wouldn't be called a loophole if it was legitimate. Loophole implies there's some kind of something wrong with it. The fact that you can't quite point out what it is is what makes it a loophole.
- nostrebored 5y ago
  It absolutely would be. Labeling things as loopholes is politically motivated. It also absolves lawmakers of the responsibility to create functional laws when they can label people who follow them abusive.
gre345t34 5y ago
Why should hackers be prosecuted for using systems as they're programmed?
midasuni 5y ago
Same reason people breaking into a website using a bug should be punished. The bug shouldn’t be there, and if you find the bug and do a responsible disclosure that should be fine, but to ezploit the bug for your own gain is not ok.
- lethologica 5y ago
  But it’s still not illegal, which means it’s legal, which means it’s perfectly acceptable to do.
  - PickledHotdog 5y ago
    From a legal perspective, perhaps, but many it's neither a moral or ethical one
  - criddell 5y ago
    Do you live your life by the idea that anything not specifically illegal is acceptable for you to do? Probably not because a lot of societal norms are regulated by shame and shared ideas of decency. This decision was made by a person or small group of people inside Amazon. Maybe those people wouldn’t have made that decision if their identities could become public?
    - chii 5y ago
      > Do you live your life by the idea that anything not specifically illegal is acceptable for you to do? it should be acceptable. > a lot of societal norms are regulated by shame and shared ideas of decency. and i think that's wrong - if it's not a good idea to perform certain actions, then enshrine it in law, and explicitly say it's not alright to do.
      - anakaine 5y ago
        Where do you draw the line? When religion gets a foothold in a place then popular sentiment, imparted by religion, can be made law. Examples: Homosexuality, women showing their faces, women travelling without a male family escort, all illegal. There is a saying: "Legislate in haste, perish at leisure". Not all things should require legislation, and those that are to be legislated should be fully and thoroughly considered. Often times it can be best to rely upon the moral will of society to impart a desired action than it is to strictly enforce compliance with that action. Its not perfect, but neither hard-line or soft-line is.

Retric 5y ago

Loopholes are legal in theory but not necessarily in practice. They could have just as easily ruled that the use of a private truck requires compensation on top of pay.

bennysomething 5y ago
If you declare loop holes some how illegal you introduce arbitrary judgement.
- guipsp 5y ago
  All judgement is arbitrary
- Retric 5y ago
  Often they are exploring bugs in the legal system which unsurprisingly give arbitrary output when litigated.
  - deleted 5y ago
    [deleted]
- AussieWog93 5y ago
  For what it's worth, etymology of the word "arbitrary": late Middle English (in the sense ‘dependent on one's will or pleasure, discretionary’): from Latin arbitrarius, from arbiter ‘judge, supreme ruler’, perhaps influenced by French arbitraire . Literally comes from the Latin word for a judge!

AussieWog93 5y ago

>Why should companies or people be punished for finding and using loopholes? You answered it yourself. They're against the spirit of the law. In any other circumstance where rules or obligations are enforced, exploiting loopholes is completely unacceptable behaviour. (To clarify, I'm not arguing that the judge made the wrong decision in this particular case. Instead, I don't think this type of behaviour should be tolerated by the system at all.)

mytailorisrich 5y ago
In a system based on the rule of law the only way to make people stop using loopholes is to close them by changing the law. People are entitled to do what's in their best interest by staying within the law to the limit. If the issue is one of interpretation of the law then courts are there to decide.
- gilrain 5y ago
  This is entirely opposite of how our courts are designed and obliged to work. Please educate yourself.
  - lotsofpulp 5y ago
    How does this lead to anything other than the justice system being able to selectively target entities?
    - myfavoritedog 5y ago
chii 5y ago
> They're against the spirit of the law. and if you're against the spirit, but find a loophole? you do not technically break the law, and achieve your objectives. The law maker is at fault, if there are loop holes.

AniseAbyss 5y ago

Because we live in a society. Illegals sub contracting delivery vans, delivery drivers using their kids as free labor. The whole industry is screwed. And I'm a hypocrite because I order stuff online as well.

lenkite 5y ago

> By definition, loopholes are perfectly legal. They may be against the spirit of the law, but they are still legal As long as you can bribe - oops sorry I meant donate to your local politician(s) to keep these 'perfectly legal' laws intact...

lordnacho 5y ago

It wouldn't be called a loophole if it was legitimate. Loophole implies there's some kind of something wrong with it. The fact that you can't quite point out what it is is what makes it a loophole.

nostrebored 5y ago
It absolutely would be. Labeling things as loopholes is politically motivated. It also absolves lawmakers of the responsibility to create functional laws when they can label people who follow them abusive.

gre345t34 5y ago

Why should hackers be prosecuted for using systems as they're programmed?

midasuni 5y ago

Same reason people breaking into a website using a bug should be punished. The bug shouldn’t be there, and if you find the bug and do a responsible disclosure that should be fine, but to ezploit the bug for your own gain is not ok.

lethologica 5y ago
But it’s still not illegal, which means it’s legal, which means it’s perfectly acceptable to do.
- PickledHotdog 5y ago
  From a legal perspective, perhaps, but many it's neither a moral or ethical one
- criddell 5y ago
  Do you live your life by the idea that anything not specifically illegal is acceptable for you to do? Probably not because a lot of societal norms are regulated by shame and shared ideas of decency. This decision was made by a person or small group of people inside Amazon. Maybe those people wouldn’t have made that decision if their identities could become public?
  - chii 5y ago
    > Do you live your life by the idea that anything not specifically illegal is acceptable for you to do? it should be acceptable. > a lot of societal norms are regulated by shame and shared ideas of decency. and i think that's wrong - if it's not a good idea to perform certain actions, then enshrine it in law, and explicitly say it's not alright to do.
    - anakaine 5y ago
      Where do you draw the line? When religion gets a foothold in a place then popular sentiment, imparted by religion, can be made law. Examples: Homosexuality, women showing their faces, women travelling without a male family escort, all illegal. There is a saying: "Legislate in haste, perish at leisure". Not all things should require legislation, and those that are to be legislated should be fully and thoroughly considered. Often times it can be best to rely upon the moral will of society to impart a desired action than it is to strictly enforce compliance with that action. Its not perfect, but neither hard-line or soft-line is.