3 ms·
Fiduciary duty to shareholders. A blackout preventing searches (rather than an informative message that users can easily dismiss) would impact revenue and might
by biot 15y ago
Fiduciary duty to shareholders. A blackout preventing searches (rather than an informative message that users can easily dismiss) would impact revenue and might result in a shareholder lawsuit. Not to mention the impact to AdSense [edit: I meant to say AdWords] advertisers who might see that as an SLA violation.
- jlarocco 15y agoDoes AdSense have an SLA? In any case, I'd be shocked if the contracts weren't in terms of number of searches. If 0 searches are done, there will be 0 AdSense "hits". The "fiduciary duty" to shareholders seems pretty far fetched and could be argued the other way as well. Enforcing SOPA will be a heavy financial burden and negatively impact future performance, therefore not using every means necessary to block SOPA is also a breach of "fiduciary duty".
- biot 15y agoI completely agree that it could go both ways. However, anybody can sue for anything these days. While opposing SOPA is the responsible choice, I can see a potential shareholder suit claiming that opposing SOPA could be done without taking drastic measures (ie: a blackout rather than a dismissible message) that immediately impact revenue.
- buddy_nuggs 15y agoReddit also has shareholders, even though it is a private company. Fiduciary duty obligations apply to Reddit management as well. IMO, management at these companies would have a very strong argument that opposing SOPA in dramatic fashion would be more likely to increase shareholder value in the long run.