10 ms·

> "What is a shock: This time around, the SEC and DOJ have both declined to investigate Microsoft over the same types of bribes in the Middle East and Africa. T

> "What is a shock: This time around, the SEC and DOJ have both declined to investigate Microsoft over the same types of bribes in the Middle East and Africa. They acknowledged my evidence (which I submitted three times) yet did not take up the case, claiming that the current pandemic has prevented them from gathering more evidence from abroad—even though I have already provided documentation that I believe shows Microsoft is in breach of the 2019 agreement and is still participating in corrupt business practices in direct violation of U.S. law." I have no words for this one. I guess being a trillion dollar company comes with a lot of benefits. Source: https://www.lioness.co/post/microsoft-is-using-illegal-bribes-in-the-middle-east-and-africa-why-is-the-sec-turning-a-blind-eye https://www.lioness.co/post/microsoft-is-using-illegal-bribe...

encryptluks2 5y ago
The same bribes/kickbacks are very big in government contracts. Not sure what the DoJ would do when they would up investigating themselves.
- raincom 5y ago
  With one major difference: in Africa, in general in the third world countries, whom to bribe, how much to bribe, who is the intermediary who handles the bribes, etc--are common knowledge. In the developed word, that is secret--only accessible to the super wealthy.
- yonaguska 5y ago
  The military industrial complex, and the intelligence communities are above the government. Investigations would never take place, unless they were fake and only to placate the public. Lots of our dark foreign policy, is orchestrated through NGO's like the National Endowment for Democracy, where they then go on to do all kinds of illegal things in other countries. All is legal in the name of "national security".
thathndude 5y ago
To the extent the article gets anything wrong, it's the focus on just Microsoft. Microsoft is not some lone, bad actor here.
- soperj 5y ago
  Who cares? Start with the one they have evidence on and move on to the next one.
  - jimbob45 5y ago
    You say that but that’s basically what happened with US v. Microsoft and they never moved onto the next. Apple is doing far worse with Safari on iOS and the DOJ refuses to apply the same standard. This seems like reverse rule of “if you’re going to bring food, you have to bring enough for the whole class”.
    - cjbgkagh 5y ago
      Microsoft refused to pay lobbyist, now they do. AFAIK Apple never made that mistake.
      - snowwrestler 5y ago
        No, Apple has a tiny lobbying operation and does not do corporate PAC contributions at all. The real explanation is that Apple makes computers so they can legally control software however they want. When Microsoft got in trouble in the 1990s, they did not make computers, they were only a supplier. So they got in trouble for interfering with other suppliers. This is one reason Microsoft now makes and sells computers directly to consumers.
- nopenopenopeno 5y ago
  How would that qualify as getting something wrong?
Overtonwindow 5y ago
I work in government, and I remember a story told to me by a federal official who was involved in the arrest of a former member of congress for bribery. The official told me that, essentially what the congressman did was illegal under federal law, but it was what you had to do in order to "do business" in "those parts of the world." I found that interesting. With what is going on today in the world, between nations committing human rights abuse and war, America still does business with them. Money exchanges hands, which furthers human rights abuses' and war because that's what our policymakers believe we needed to do to achieve our goals. One is breaking the law to achieve a goal, but what is the other called?
- deleted 5y ago
  [deleted]
- igetspam 5y ago
  While in India once, I ran into a friend from Google who was out there trying to build a data center. Total coincidence that we were both there at the same time. I was there to hire and train for another company and he was there to break ground. He'd been there for week and they'd yet to start doing more than some bare minimums related to surveys and permits. I was surprised that he was there at all, given the current state of construction. It turns out, they were way off target and they thought there was more progress already. Every time he spoke to anyone about permits and approvals, they'd say it was almost done and then there would be a delay. Amazon and Microsoft had been building in the area already and they had started the process much later. The difference? Google has a very strict policy on bribes. If you pay one, you won't be reimbursed and if they do and out, you won't be employed any longer. Microsoft and Amazon had no such policy and the conversations my friend had with his counterparts at those companies were pretty forthcoming about it. It's just how business is done there and if you don't play ball, you will have a hard time. Of course they paid. You have to. If you don't, things will happen eventually but that timeline is unpredictable. I'm sure Google found ways to ethically encourage progress eventually.
  - missedthecue 5y ago
    Meanwhile in America and the entire west to an extent, you have the government trying to "bribe" businesses to open in their jurisdiction through tax incentives and so forth. Really interesting cultural difference.
mc32 5y ago
Are the bribes being directed by MS US or are these things taking place in overseas offices where customs are different? One example was Hungary --I imagine Ukraine and Nigeria too would have executives there who are part of the local culture where they do things differently. While the actions go afoul of US law, they may be in line with local customs culture and practices --that is harder to root out as now you are trying to change another culture (cultural imperialism as it was called). If this is being directed from the US, then it's easier to root out.
- aeternum 5y ago
  Yes, a bribe in one country is often seen as just the cost of doing business in another. In the US should tips be considered bribes? What if you tip at the beginning rather than the end in order to get better service?
  - mistrial9 5y ago
    this is a formal fallacy - joining something substantial, serious and a matter of public law, to something personal, of little consequence, and governed at a local level. please reconsider this as this important public discussion evolves on YNews?
    - aeternum 5y ago
      What is your definition of bribe then? Keep in mind that in countries like Cambodia and Yemen, something like 70% of public companies receive bribes. It is very much common practice and culturally acceptable.
      - edgyquant 5y ago
        I would say at that level of acceptance it isn’t a bribe.
        ipaddr 5y ago
reincarnate0x14 5y ago
More likely that Microsoft learned a very good lesson from their 1990s encounter with the DOJ, but it wasn't the hoped for "stop doing illegal and unethical things" but instead "make more and better targeted political contributions."
- slim 5y ago
  and share data with 3 letter agencies
  - datavirtue 5y ago
    Another form of corruption.
SubiculumCode 5y ago
Corruption does terrible things to a society. I look at how Russia, Mexico, Greece and others were/are absolutely crippled by wide-spread, run-of-the-mill corruption at all levels of government. We have always been our best in the USA when corruption has been the least prevalent. The "legalized bribery" from campaign donations and regulatory capture, while not as bad as in those other countries, does not do our system justice.
snarf21 5y ago
This is what life in an oligarchy is all about. Now, back to checking how much the S&P 500 is up today.
jollybean 5y ago
Why would anyone be shocked? This is how business is done in most of the world. If it's a 'standard practice' - then it is 'accounted for' and effectively part of the equation. How else do you think think the states vast wealth trickles out to it's citizens? The $10M Bribe to the Minister of Education goes t pay for the construction of his Mansion, staff, services. What 'mostly matters' in these kinds of situations frankly is de facto transparency and efficacy. If the ration are 'understood' and actually well-strutted, then there's a kind of de-facto transparency. In the case of a rich state like Qatar, it might actually be better than simply having nothing. You could argue the 'lack of competitiveness' from MSFT bids given alternatives, but in many cases it really might not matter, the 'winner' was a fait-accompli anyhow. When this is Nigeria, and the state is providing it's citizens with nothing, then it's much more of a problem. I should also note that this is a function of the regional system, not MS. MS is playing the game that's handed to them. Their alternative choice is to pull out of all of those markets, and hand them over to other businesses who operate that way. The 'problem' should mostly be directed at state agencies setting up the system. There should be more analysis and journalism on this kind of stuff, particularly because it does happen in countries wherein 'regular people' do end up paying the price, but the focus should on the agencies, not businesses who would otherwise play fairly. This is a nuanced issue and we should not be 'shocked and horrified' by it, this almost implies a serious kind of naivte. We need to recognise that it's complicated before just trying to 'blame MSFT'.
Kankuro 5y ago
US authorities don't investigate about MS (hopefully they will), but they use the extraterritoriality of US laws to sue foreign companies who corrupted in a foreign country. The French company Alstom (rolling stock and gas/nuke turbines manufacturer) was prosecuted for corruption… in Indonesia [1]. I'm all for fighting against corruption everywhere, but here it looks like the case was allegedly used to force to sell the power division to General Electric. These turbines are used by the nuclear plants in France, so they are quite critical and could have been used by the US authorities to negotiate something with France. I would have preferred if those guys were sued in France in the first place. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alstom#Judicial_troubles https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alstom#Judicial_troubles
softwarebeware 5y ago
Meanwhile ... the SEC and DOJ are in a backroom meeting with Microsoft with their hands out for more bribes. :)

encryptluks2 5y ago

The same bribes/kickbacks are very big in government contracts. Not sure what the DoJ would do when they would up investigating themselves.

raincom 5y ago
With one major difference: in Africa, in general in the third world countries, whom to bribe, how much to bribe, who is the intermediary who handles the bribes, etc--are common knowledge. In the developed word, that is secret--only accessible to the super wealthy.
yonaguska 5y ago
The military industrial complex, and the intelligence communities are above the government. Investigations would never take place, unless they were fake and only to placate the public. Lots of our dark foreign policy, is orchestrated through NGO's like the National Endowment for Democracy, where they then go on to do all kinds of illegal things in other countries. All is legal in the name of "national security".

thathndude 5y ago

To the extent the article gets anything wrong, it's the focus on just Microsoft. Microsoft is not some lone, bad actor here.

soperj 5y ago
Who cares? Start with the one they have evidence on and move on to the next one.
- jimbob45 5y ago
  You say that but that’s basically what happened with US v. Microsoft and they never moved onto the next. Apple is doing far worse with Safari on iOS and the DOJ refuses to apply the same standard. This seems like reverse rule of “if you’re going to bring food, you have to bring enough for the whole class”.
  - cjbgkagh 5y ago
    Microsoft refused to pay lobbyist, now they do. AFAIK Apple never made that mistake.
    - snowwrestler 5y ago
      No, Apple has a tiny lobbying operation and does not do corporate PAC contributions at all. The real explanation is that Apple makes computers so they can legally control software however they want. When Microsoft got in trouble in the 1990s, they did not make computers, they were only a supplier. So they got in trouble for interfering with other suppliers. This is one reason Microsoft now makes and sells computers directly to consumers.
nopenopenopeno 5y ago
How would that qualify as getting something wrong?

Overtonwindow 5y ago

I work in government, and I remember a story told to me by a federal official who was involved in the arrest of a former member of congress for bribery. The official told me that, essentially what the congressman did was illegal under federal law, but it was what you had to do in order to "do business" in "those parts of the world." I found that interesting. With what is going on today in the world, between nations committing human rights abuse and war, America still does business with them. Money exchanges hands, which furthers human rights abuses' and war because that's what our policymakers believe we needed to do to achieve our goals. One is breaking the law to achieve a goal, but what is the other called?

deleted 5y ago
[deleted]
igetspam 5y ago
While in India once, I ran into a friend from Google who was out there trying to build a data center. Total coincidence that we were both there at the same time. I was there to hire and train for another company and he was there to break ground. He'd been there for week and they'd yet to start doing more than some bare minimums related to surveys and permits. I was surprised that he was there at all, given the current state of construction. It turns out, they were way off target and they thought there was more progress already. Every time he spoke to anyone about permits and approvals, they'd say it was almost done and then there would be a delay. Amazon and Microsoft had been building in the area already and they had started the process much later. The difference? Google has a very strict policy on bribes. If you pay one, you won't be reimbursed and if they do and out, you won't be employed any longer. Microsoft and Amazon had no such policy and the conversations my friend had with his counterparts at those companies were pretty forthcoming about it. It's just how business is done there and if you don't play ball, you will have a hard time. Of course they paid. You have to. If you don't, things will happen eventually but that timeline is unpredictable. I'm sure Google found ways to ethically encourage progress eventually.
- missedthecue 5y ago
  Meanwhile in America and the entire west to an extent, you have the government trying to "bribe" businesses to open in their jurisdiction through tax incentives and so forth. Really interesting cultural difference.

mc32 5y ago

Are the bribes being directed by MS US or are these things taking place in overseas offices where customs are different? One example was Hungary --I imagine Ukraine and Nigeria too would have executives there who are part of the local culture where they do things differently. While the actions go afoul of US law, they may be in line with local customs culture and practices --that is harder to root out as now you are trying to change another culture (cultural imperialism as it was called). If this is being directed from the US, then it's easier to root out.

aeternum 5y ago
Yes, a bribe in one country is often seen as just the cost of doing business in another. In the US should tips be considered bribes? What if you tip at the beginning rather than the end in order to get better service?
- mistrial9 5y ago
  this is a formal fallacy - joining something substantial, serious and a matter of public law, to something personal, of little consequence, and governed at a local level. please reconsider this as this important public discussion evolves on YNews?
  - aeternum 5y ago
    What is your definition of bribe then? Keep in mind that in countries like Cambodia and Yemen, something like 70% of public companies receive bribes. It is very much common practice and culturally acceptable.
    - edgyquant 5y ago
      I would say at that level of acceptance it isn’t a bribe.
      - ipaddr 5y ago

reincarnate0x14 5y ago

More likely that Microsoft learned a very good lesson from their 1990s encounter with the DOJ, but it wasn't the hoped for "stop doing illegal and unethical things" but instead "make more and better targeted political contributions."

slim 5y ago
and share data with 3 letter agencies
- datavirtue 5y ago
  Another form of corruption.

SubiculumCode 5y ago

Corruption does terrible things to a society. I look at how Russia, Mexico, Greece and others were/are absolutely crippled by wide-spread, run-of-the-mill corruption at all levels of government. We have always been our best in the USA when corruption has been the least prevalent. The "legalized bribery" from campaign donations and regulatory capture, while not as bad as in those other countries, does not do our system justice.

snarf21 5y ago

This is what life in an oligarchy is all about. Now, back to checking how much the S&P 500 is up today.

jollybean 5y ago

Why would anyone be shocked? This is how business is done in most of the world. If it's a 'standard practice' - then it is 'accounted for' and effectively part of the equation. How else do you think think the states vast wealth trickles out to it's citizens? The $10M Bribe to the Minister of Education goes t pay for the construction of his Mansion, staff, services. What 'mostly matters' in these kinds of situations frankly is de facto transparency and efficacy. If the ration are 'understood' and actually well-strutted, then there's a kind of de-facto transparency. In the case of a rich state like Qatar, it might actually be better than simply having nothing. You could argue the 'lack of competitiveness' from MSFT bids given alternatives, but in many cases it really might not matter, the 'winner' was a fait-accompli anyhow. When this is Nigeria, and the state is providing it's citizens with nothing, then it's much more of a problem. I should also note that this is a function of the regional system, not MS. MS is playing the game that's handed to them. Their alternative choice is to pull out of all of those markets, and hand them over to other businesses who operate that way. The 'problem' should mostly be directed at state agencies setting up the system. There should be more analysis and journalism on this kind of stuff, particularly because it does happen in countries wherein 'regular people' do end up paying the price, but the focus should on the agencies, not businesses who would otherwise play fairly. This is a nuanced issue and we should not be 'shocked and horrified' by it, this almost implies a serious kind of naivte. We need to recognise that it's complicated before just trying to 'blame MSFT'.

Kankuro 5y ago

US authorities don't investigate about MS (hopefully they will), but they use the extraterritoriality of US laws to sue foreign companies who corrupted in a foreign country. The French company Alstom (rolling stock and gas/nuke turbines manufacturer) was prosecuted for corruption… in Indonesia [1]. I'm all for fighting against corruption everywhere, but here it looks like the case was allegedly used to force to sell the power division to General Electric. These turbines are used by the nuclear plants in France, so they are quite critical and could have been used by the US authorities to negotiate something with France. I would have preferred if those guys were sued in France in the first place. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alstom#Judicial_troubles https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alstom#Judicial_troubles

softwarebeware 5y ago

Meanwhile ... the SEC and DOJ are in a backroom meeting with Microsoft with their hands out for more bribes. :)