15 ms·
It appears like they're just going through a "rebranding" https://mobile.twitter.com/Pingu/status/1469314222349852675 https://mobile.twitter.com/Pingu/status/1
by sva_ 5y ago
It appears like they're just going through a "rebranding"
https://mobile.twitter.com/Pingu/status/1469314222349852675 https://mobile.twitter.com/Pingu/status/1469314222349852675
Quote from the OP article:
> the public prosecutor's office wanted to secure the assets potentially obtained from an unlawful act by means of an asset freeze in order to be able to confiscate them if necessary. The group of companies escaped seizure through insolvency
So you know what's going on.
- uniqueuid 5y agoIt seems a bit more complicated - there's a great post from netzpolitik [1] (in German, unfortunately) listing all the gory details. Again, all of this came to light because of the hard and persistent work of a whole bunch of NGOs (GFF, netzpolitik, CCC and so on). [1] https://netzpolitik.org/2022/nach-pfaendung-staatstrojaner-hersteller-finfisher-ist-geschlossen-und-bleibt-es-auch/ https://netzpolitik.org/2022/nach-pfaendung-staatstrojaner-h...
- sva_ 5y agoGood source. It sounds a bit like they were destroying the evidence with that move then. Like throwing a match into a gasoline-doused crime scene.
- hacka22 5y agohttps://netzpolitik.org/2022/nach-pfaendung-staatstrojaner-hersteller-finfisher-ist-geschlossen-und-bleibt-es-auch/ https://netzpolitik.org/2022/nach-pfaendung-staatstrojaner-h... (German) reads like it is more than a rebranding. But there are certainly new entrepreneurs who will fill the gap
- actionfromafar 5y agoMeet your new entrepreneurs. Same as your old entrepreneurs.
- OtomotO 5y agoSame shit, new package
- bjarneh 5y ago> companies escaped seizure through insolvency This is a strange arrangement that I guess most countries follow. Companies are legal entities, that can be sued and so on. But a company cannot go to jail (board members or stock owners don't typically go to jail either). These legal entities can also seize to exist (like in this example), and then there is nobody left to be held accountable... It seems like most countries treat companies better than humans.
- nikanj 5y agoMost countries also stop criminal & civil proceedings if the human in question ceases to exist
- vincnetas 5y agoYes, but creating a company does not require 18 years compared to raising adult human. So this can be throw away entities.
- OtomotO 5y agoBut ceasing to exist and dying are similar yet also different concepts. A company can cease to exist on a whim, yet be reborn the next minute under a different name, with the same "genes", the same "information", because the actual living, breathing people behind it, just move on.
- y4mi 5y agoThey don't though? They'd follow through if person a profited from fraud,then died and inherited that money to a third person. With companies it just ends there and then
- bjarneh 5y ago> ceases to exist Exactly, you cannot just change name and buy a mustache like these companies basically can.
- jacquesm 5y agoBig difference between board members and stockholders. Board members are liable to some extent stockholders almost never are, unless the business was specifically founded to facilitate crime. That's where the term Ultimate Beneficiary comes into play.
- GameOfFrowns 5y ago>It appears like they're just going through a "rebranding" IIRC the new company name, Vilic(i)us, describes the position of a "slave overseer" of Roman times. Unfortunately, I cannot find the wikipedia entry for it anymore (possible clean-up job of the new company?). Edit: Found it... https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vilicus https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vilicus