3 ms·

It's a shame really, false statements by corporations rarely get prosecuted. Corporate statements\speech needs to be regulated. There needs to be a law that ho

It's a shame really, false statements by corporations rarely get prosecuted. Corporate statements\speech needs to be regulated. There needs to be a law that holds them explicitly to any and all statements.

stikit 3y ago
[flagged]
readthenotes1 3y ago
Why should corporations be held more accountable than any other person*?
- toomuchtodo 3y ago
  Securities fraud and SEC Rule 10b-5 > "The federal securities laws prohibit deceptive conduct and material misrepresentations in the purchase or sale of securities," said Kathryn A. Pyszka, an Associate Director in the SEC’s Chicago Regional Office. "We will take action when, as alleged, parties fraudulently induce investors to sell their securities through lies and deception." From random press release: https://www.sec.gov/news/press-release/2022-17 https://www.sec.gov/news/press-release/2022-17 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SEC_Rule_10b-5 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SEC_Rule_10b-5
  - wcunning 3y ago
    See every Matt Levine column ever -- Everything is Securities Fraud. That is the actual interpretation of 10b-5 by the SEC and by the activist investor class (not meant as a denigrating term, merely descriptive of investors actively taking interest in their portfolio companies to the point that they sue over deceptive claims). I expect the lawsuit to follow, but might take a few months to file.
    - Phileosopher 3y ago
      I'm not so certain about that. In the world of securities, civil lawsuits are a profit-making scheme. I'm not an expert on it, so I'm wondering: as it stands, can an SEC court indicate that Amazon made a material change to their company value by walking their promise to be greener back?
- anigbrowl 3y ago
  Because they're not people. Frankly, I think false statements by individuals that constitute some sort of public commitment (for which they reasonably expect to receive praise, positive PR, or subsidies of some kind) should also be prosecutable. Lying and bullshitting for profit are far too well tolerated.
- Prickle 3y ago
  Why shouldn't they? Public individuals are routinely held accountable for their statements. Why shouldn't customers be allowed to hold corporations to the same standards? If corporations promise a feature, then fail to deliver, they should be held liable for false advertisement. Similarly, if Microsoft promises Windows 10 is the last "Windows Version", then launches Windows 11, we should be allowed to sue them for making false statements. Oh wait I just want a law that makes false advertisement absolutely, unequivocally, illegal. Corporations should sell what they have now, not what they might have in the future.
  - readthenotes1 3y ago
    Actually, i was being sarcastic... The legal fiction if corporations being legal person-like that shields sackler's and whoever headed the credit rating agencies leading up to 2008 is obscene
  - imgabe 3y ago
    When are public individuals held accountable for their statements? Public figures lie constantly, they tell us there's WMDs in Iraq, that inflation is transitory, that an election was stolen, and on and on. They never get held accountable. How would you even begin to differentiate between people who are lying and people who are simply wrong? > Why shouldn't customers be allowed to hold corporations to the same standards? Nothing is stopping customers from holding corporations accountable, by taking their business elsewhere if they find a corporation to be unreliable.
    - Prickle 3y ago
      > When are public individuals held accountable for their statements? "Public individual" is not exclusive to members of the american government. Should we legislate that as well? Nations have started legislating laws against falsehoods after all. Minor public figures, the latest most "current" example being video creators on social media platforms, are routinely held accountable for failure to disclose sponsorships. Why aren't corporations found in legal trouble for failing to disclose that XYZ feature was never going to happen? I should add, private individuals are also held accountable for statements in court. Why should such things be exclusive to courts? Does the truth only matter in front of a judge? Should we not find the act of lying for the sake of greater sales, a despicable act? > Nothing is stopping customers from holding corporations accountable, by taking their business elsewhere if they find a corporation to be unreliable. This is a blatant lie. Customers boycotting Chevron doesn't stop them from buying judges and violating the environments of various nations such as Ecuador. Individual consumers, even consumers coming together to form a large group, still cannot effect any major damage to a corporation. The only entities that can truly "fight" a corporation are similarly sized governments or organized violent attacks on corporate property.
- DoktorDelta 3y ago
  Because corporations have a larger impact on the world than any other person*
- mcbits 3y ago
  Same reason governments should be held more accountable than any other person, if we're going by the "group of persons = person" definition of person.
- thechangelog 3y ago
  Because they have vastly more resources, vastly more externalities and vastly more ability to make measurable change. And because their fiduciary duty is for profit and not a sustainable world, their accountability should be even higher.
  - anticensor 3y ago
    This is only the case in Sweden, and only for Aktienbolayet type companies. No other for-profit entity has a legally required fiduciary obligation to return profits.
- salawat 3y ago
  Because they are legal fictions only suffered to exist in order to allow people to do risky things.
- saghm 3y ago
  They can't be put in jail, given the death penalty, vote, or be taxed at the same rate as "any other person"; to turn the question around, what makes you presume that this is one of the cases where they should be treated like a person and not one of the ones where they're not, when there are numerous examples of both?
- newswasboring 3y ago
  They have a lot more power than any person. More power, more responsibility.

stikit 3y ago

[flagged]

readthenotes1 3y ago

Why should corporations be held more accountable than any other person*?

toomuchtodo 3y ago
Securities fraud and SEC Rule 10b-5 > "The federal securities laws prohibit deceptive conduct and material misrepresentations in the purchase or sale of securities," said Kathryn A. Pyszka, an Associate Director in the SEC’s Chicago Regional Office. "We will take action when, as alleged, parties fraudulently induce investors to sell their securities through lies and deception." From random press release: https://www.sec.gov/news/press-release/2022-17 https://www.sec.gov/news/press-release/2022-17 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SEC_Rule_10b-5 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SEC_Rule_10b-5
- wcunning 3y ago
  See every Matt Levine column ever -- Everything is Securities Fraud. That is the actual interpretation of 10b-5 by the SEC and by the activist investor class (not meant as a denigrating term, merely descriptive of investors actively taking interest in their portfolio companies to the point that they sue over deceptive claims). I expect the lawsuit to follow, but might take a few months to file.
  - Phileosopher 3y ago
    I'm not so certain about that. In the world of securities, civil lawsuits are a profit-making scheme. I'm not an expert on it, so I'm wondering: as it stands, can an SEC court indicate that Amazon made a material change to their company value by walking their promise to be greener back?
anigbrowl 3y ago
Because they're not people. Frankly, I think false statements by individuals that constitute some sort of public commitment (for which they reasonably expect to receive praise, positive PR, or subsidies of some kind) should also be prosecutable. Lying and bullshitting for profit are far too well tolerated.
Prickle 3y ago
Why shouldn't they? Public individuals are routinely held accountable for their statements. Why shouldn't customers be allowed to hold corporations to the same standards? If corporations promise a feature, then fail to deliver, they should be held liable for false advertisement. Similarly, if Microsoft promises Windows 10 is the last "Windows Version", then launches Windows 11, we should be allowed to sue them for making false statements. Oh wait I just want a law that makes false advertisement absolutely, unequivocally, illegal. Corporations should sell what they have now, not what they might have in the future.
- readthenotes1 3y ago
  Actually, i was being sarcastic... The legal fiction if corporations being legal person-like that shields sackler's and whoever headed the credit rating agencies leading up to 2008 is obscene
- imgabe 3y ago
  When are public individuals held accountable for their statements? Public figures lie constantly, they tell us there's WMDs in Iraq, that inflation is transitory, that an election was stolen, and on and on. They never get held accountable. How would you even begin to differentiate between people who are lying and people who are simply wrong? > Why shouldn't customers be allowed to hold corporations to the same standards? Nothing is stopping customers from holding corporations accountable, by taking their business elsewhere if they find a corporation to be unreliable.
  - Prickle 3y ago
    > When are public individuals held accountable for their statements? "Public individual" is not exclusive to members of the american government. Should we legislate that as well? Nations have started legislating laws against falsehoods after all. Minor public figures, the latest most "current" example being video creators on social media platforms, are routinely held accountable for failure to disclose sponsorships. Why aren't corporations found in legal trouble for failing to disclose that XYZ feature was never going to happen? I should add, private individuals are also held accountable for statements in court. Why should such things be exclusive to courts? Does the truth only matter in front of a judge? Should we not find the act of lying for the sake of greater sales, a despicable act? > Nothing is stopping customers from holding corporations accountable, by taking their business elsewhere if they find a corporation to be unreliable. This is a blatant lie. Customers boycotting Chevron doesn't stop them from buying judges and violating the environments of various nations such as Ecuador. Individual consumers, even consumers coming together to form a large group, still cannot effect any major damage to a corporation. The only entities that can truly "fight" a corporation are similarly sized governments or organized violent attacks on corporate property.
DoktorDelta 3y ago
Because corporations have a larger impact on the world than any other person*
mcbits 3y ago
Same reason governments should be held more accountable than any other person, if we're going by the "group of persons = person" definition of person.
thechangelog 3y ago
Because they have vastly more resources, vastly more externalities and vastly more ability to make measurable change. And because their fiduciary duty is for profit and not a sustainable world, their accountability should be even higher.
- anticensor 3y ago
  This is only the case in Sweden, and only for Aktienbolayet type companies. No other for-profit entity has a legally required fiduciary obligation to return profits.
salawat 3y ago
Because they are legal fictions only suffered to exist in order to allow people to do risky things.
saghm 3y ago
They can't be put in jail, given the death penalty, vote, or be taxed at the same rate as "any other person"; to turn the question around, what makes you presume that this is one of the cases where they should be treated like a person and not one of the ones where they're not, when there are numerous examples of both?
newswasboring 3y ago
They have a lot more power than any person. More power, more responsibility.