Slashdot Mirror
Australian Firm Asks SCO To Detail Evidence
An anonymous reader submits A Perth, Western Australian company called CyberKnights has told SCO ANZ's MD to detail its IP claims or face legal action for fraud. SCO has just released licenses for Australasia and claims enquiries by several companies already."
That being said, our high standards of evidence are something we should be proud of. I just think that the stupidity/ignorance defense should be done away with at a corporate executive/director level. We need the equivalent of Sarbannes-Oxley for ALL corporate behavior, not just the financials, since there are other kinds of corporate fraud damaging the economy and the public trust in America, beyond misleading 10K submissions.
Just think of the stock market as a giant slot machine where you need a broker to pull the handle. Pure unadulturated greed is what keeps it alive. Investing in SCO is a excelent example of this greed. Gotta make a gazillion buckaroos before the end of the day. Like all gambling addicts, the invester is probably trying to recoup their losses from other investments. I'm sure some will make out very nicely.
What?
As Americans sit and watch other countries do what we should have done 4 months ago, I can only shake my head in dismay at all the money we throw at lawyers to settle something that any moron could figure out.
This isn't Roe v. Wade, it's a simple verification of the code, no ethical delimas to deal with here.
it's not wrong in and of itself, but let's look at Enron as an example. They certainly maximized shareholder value for a while there. Unfortunately they acted illegally and certainly immorally in the process.
It's a catch-22. In the 70s, there was the belief that the board and corporate executives weren't really doing all they could to maximize shareholder value, so they started paying them heavily in stock options and incentives. The result has been many executive who will do whatever it takes, including breaking the law, if it makes the shareholders happy. And if they do manange to increase stock price enough, they can afford enough lawyers that their misdeeds go unpunished, and you might even make enough money and enough campaign contributions that the feds could change their mind about prosecuting you.
Basically the problem is that companies are run by humans; usually very clever and creative people. They found they can get rich by a little bend here, a loophole there, and a tiny little bit of fraud over here. Since everyone is happy when shares go up, a whistleblower is ostracized since they might hurt the value of the stock!
What ought to happen is this:
The Executives get to pick *ONE*
A) I'm a total idiot. I had no idea what my company was doing - I'm not liable for the companies misdeeds.
B) I knew exactly what was going on. That's what I'm paid for. I'm personally responsible for the acts of my company.
However, if they pick A, the shareholders, companies and entities owed funds by the company, and anyone who can show damages can sue the execs personally for fraud and deception. Clearly they got everyone to believe they had the skill to perform their jobs, but didn't. Thus, their pay and all assets resulting from that pay go directly to the company, and all who suffered from it's demise. (This should equally apply to the board positions, as they are the ones who are *supposed* to make sure the company in under good management and run properly.)
Cheers,
Greg
Wrong? Well that's subjective, although I agree with you.
Stupid? Hardly. He's managed to steal the Presidency, enrich himself and his wealthy friends, illegally invade two countries (whilst fooling most of the US population), get away with changing a $200Billion budget excess into a $500billion defecit and he's managed to do away with a lot of the civil rights US citizens used to have. And there hasn't been an armed revolt and he's still a serious contender to be re-elected.
So no I don't think he's stupid, I think he is fucking smart. The stupid people are the ones who are putting up with it and paying the price. (US national debt no stands at around $24,000 for each and every man, woman and child in the country - that's how much El Presidente has borrowed in your name). Not sure how you put a price on the civil rights you guys have lost recently but it must be greater.
Bad analogies are like waxing a monkey with a rainbow.
You'd hope in vain. Executives go to minimum security prison, which is code for "rich white man prison where you are actually guarded from rape".
But for the vast majority of wealthy offenders, they will never see the inside of a courthouse, much less a prison. Ken Lay's Enron stole billions from California, with the White House providing political cover ("it's all the environmentalists' fault! Black Helicopters! Conspiracy theorists! And by the way, here's Arnold!") and will never even see the NEWS about his crimes, if he chooses not to, much less do a perp walk.
Steal $20 from a cash register, go to jail and get raped. With the People cheering and demanding pay per view.
I just noodled the reason why people don't care about wealthy people getting away with major crime: they want to BE the guys getting away with the crimes. They think it's cool! Moore might actually have nailed it: the Horatio Algier syndrome (YOU can be the rich guy who gets away with it -- it's the American Dream!) So people want, in a perverse way, a stratum of people who get all the cash and can't get convicted. In America, it's barely possible to join the elite -- although stats show most such people are just born to their status.
I have perspective born of experience. I grew up in a poor neighborhood, where just walking the street could get you arrested if you didn't look right to a cop. I've had cops break into my house right in front of me.
Contrast it to my later experience in the Chicago northern suburbs, where drugs were sold openly around school. The young scions of the suburbs openly assaulted and battered people of different colors, shapes, and religions. Car theft was common. You'd see kids you know driving around and smashing people's cars with rocks.
And there was NO CRIME RATE among these kids, officially. They never "committed" crimes -- it was invisible to the local cops, unless it was committed right in front of them.
Rich and/or connected people don't commit crimes, and they certainly don't go to jail. Well, there are exceptions, but you get the drift.
PMITAP is for the poor.