Slashdot Mirror


HP Pays $14.5M to Make Civil Charges Disappear

theodp writes "The California Attorney General's Office negotiated a $14.5 million payoff from HP as part of a settlement that calls for the state not to pursue civil charges related to the now infamous spy scandal against the company and its current or former officers or directors (felony criminal charges against five individuals still remain). HP also agreed to maintain the watchdog positions of chief ethics officer and chief privacy officer for five years."

3 of 107 comments (clear)

  1. Re:A more fashionable solution! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Informative
    Nowadays, when breaking the law, a company-supplied penalty is paid and case closed.

    "Normal" people go to jail.....


    Sigh, could you not even bother to read the summary properly? What part of "felony criminal charges against five individuals still remain" do you find difficult to grasp?

  2. Re:A more fashionable solution! by Christianson · · Score: 5, Informative
    Nowadays, when breaking the law, a company-supplied penalty is paid and case closed.

    "Normal" people go to jail.....

    People still might. The AG isn't waiving rights to press criminal charges against indiviuals, and in fact is pressing ahead with at least five cases, including against Dunn.

    This actually doesn't seem like a terrible thing to me. A civil case against HP would be an enormous burden on the state of California, drag on for years, and by the virtue of the sheer size of HP, be unlikely to result in anything more than a wrist-slap. This settlement gets HP to admit to wrongdoing, puts some measures in place (pathetic though they may be) to try and keep them from doing it again, and not only saves the state money, but gives them a warchest to go after the real villains in this case: the executives who felt that the shield of incorporation gave them the right to condone and engage in unethical behaviour.

  3. Settlement is common in civil cases! by denebian+devil · · Score: 5, Interesting

    The summary is very misleading in the way that it describes HP as paying money to make the case disappear. This wasn't a criminal case where they were buying off a judge to rule favorably. This was a civil matter. and 99 times out of 100, civil matters are about one thing: money. They can either pay money in the settlement, pay money as a result of a judgment from a trial, be dismissed through a motion, or be found not guilty from a trial. Settlement is COMMON, because it allows both sides to save costs from not having to pay for a costly trial. And trials are MUCH more costly than most of what happens pre-trial.

    This isn't some back-alley dealing, it's one legitimate and often used method of resolving civil disputes quickly and cost-effectively. And on top of that, it means that HP can't appeal the decision because they agreed to it. If the case had gone to trial and verdict and resulted in a decision HP didn't like, they could have appealed and kept the case going for years without resolution, while at the same time increasing both their costs and the costs of the state in trying the case.