Jail Time For Price-Fixing Car Parts

An anonymous reader writes "The U.S. Dept. of Justice has announced that Panasonic and its subsidiary Sanyo have been fined $56.5 million for their roles in price fixing conspiracies involving battery cells and car parts. The fines are part of a larger investigation into the prices of auto parts. Interestingly, 12 people at various companies have been sentenced to jail time, and three more are going to prison. Since the charges are felonies, none of the sentences are shorter than a year and a day. Criminal fines targeting these companies has totaled over $874 million. 'The conduct of Panasonic, SANYO, and LG Chem resulted in inflated production costs for notebook computers and cars purchased by U.S. consumers. These investigations illustrate our efforts to ensure market fairness for U.S. businesses by bringing corporations to justice when their commercial activity violates antitrust laws.'"

Comments

Banksters

[Ultracrepidarian]

And the banksters go free.

Re:Banksters

[Sycraft-fu]

Well it turns out that the US justice system is one such that people have to actually violate a law to be tried and convicted, not to just make someone on Slashdot mad. So, if you think a banker should go to jail, then let's hear the details: Who is it, what law did they break, and what evidence do you have of this? Also remember it had to be illegal at the time they did it. If new laws were introduced later in response to what happened, those don't count, the US Constitution explicitly prohibits ex post facto laws.

"They caused the economy to crash!" is not a valid answer, and also shows a rather large amount of ignorance of the situation (if you think the downturn had a singular cause, you need to do more research).

This whining gets a little old. People cry that "the bankers" (or "banksters" in your case) should go to jail but yet never seem to be able to cite specifics. That to me says you don't actually know of any laws broken, you are just mad and think that you're angry should be reason enough to convict someone.

So, if there are specific cases you think should be prosecuted, then don't whine about "banksters" as some large group, any more than someone should whine about "hackers" as some large group. Post those specific cases. If not, then maybe spend some time reconsidering your position.

Re:Banksters

[professionalfurryele]

Lets ignore the fact that your words ring hollow because they bribed and bought the system to make their acts legal. There were things which should at least result in a court case.

Improper reporting of their assets. They claimed their collateralised debt obligations were worth more than they were on their balance sheets and there is clear evidence they knew they were worth less than they claimed. How about Merril Lynch selling CDOs to Lonestar, claiming it was for 22% of the face value when the terms of the deal made it clear they were only selling them for about 6% of the face value.

Or for a more recent example HSBC acting as banker for the worlds terrorists and getting a slap on the wrist.

These people are scum, and some of them did illegal things. We should be going through our banking system one banker at a time searching all their records and looking for anything they may have done which was complicit in causing the crash and going after each and every one of them personally, no point in going after the banks themselves if we are just going to bail them out.

Re:Banksters

[dmbasso]

Perhaps you should also do your homework, like getting informed of what is happening in the world. Preferably outside the media bubble that broadcasts lies for profit.

But I'll give you one breadcrumb, google for "libor fixing". I guess that will keep you entertained for a while.

Btw, do you think the term "too big to jail" arose without a reason? There was a recent senate hearing on banks, you can find some enlightening videos on youtube. Specifically, look for senator Elizabeth Warren's questions. I mention this in case you reply the recent libor fixing scandal was restricted to the UK... to find out what is happening in the US you need to actually investigate, but that's not going to happen.

Re:Banksters

[bfandreas]

I find it remarkable that the corporate veil has actually been breached in this one. Usually personal wrong-doing is not prosecuted in price-fixing cases. The companies in question get fined and that's the end of it. Or at least that was my understanding.

Re:Banksters

[jellie]

Here's a recent example: Blythe Masters, an executive at JP Morgan Chase, may escape prosecution after having manipulated energy prices in California and Michigan. Officials have accused her of rigging prices, and they also accuse JP Morgan Chase of trying to cover up the evidence. Strangely, the recommendation was for a civil case, not a criminal case, against Ms. Masters.

Re:Banksters

[bill_mcgonigle]

People cry that "the bankers" (or "banksters" in your case) should go to jail but yet never seem to be able to cite specifics.

S&P clearly committed fraud in giving its AAA credit ratings to instruments that clearly did not deserve them. People have been talking about this since 2008 - how could you have missed it as the most specific and provable cause of the financial crisis?

There was also substantial fraud in the CDO market that was very well publicized.

There were material misrepresentations and collusion in the Bear Stearns hit, watch the Frontline program on it, and ... wait, were you being facetious?

Where is the refund for consumers ?

[Taco Cowboy]

The Fed caught the crooks, fined them, and threw some of them into the slammer.

But what about the consumers who had been cheated ?

Don't we deserve some refunds?

I mean, we paid overpriced batteries for our notebooks, overpriced car parts for our vehicles, and so on.

Don't we deserve to get our money back ?

Any attorney here ?

Re:Where is the refund for consumers ?

[lister king of smeg]

the best way to get your money would have an attorney draft a letter telling them that you plane to file a case in small claims court for the cost of one laptop battery plus legal fees, point out that the cost of giving you a new battery would cost them less than it would to fight the case even if they won.

Re:Where is the refund for consumers ?

[erroneus]

"The Fed" usually refers to the Federal Reserve Bank. It was the DOJ who brought this in and home. I'm astounded there was jail and prison time assigned. These white collar crimes of this nature don't result in such usually..,at least we never hear of it.

Ineed, the matter prosecuted was a criminal one. Based on the success of the criminal investigation and prosecution, civil suits should br brought. However, it will be the lawyers who win, not us.

Re:Where is the refund for consumers ?

[Anonymous Coward]

And when they're mugged, most people decide their lives are worth more than the cash they parted with, so you see how they were cheated?

Re:Where is the refund for consumers ?

[mcgrew]

So you think collusion and price fixing should be legal?? You, sir, are talking utter nonsense.

internet yes, movies, yes, but banks ?

[raymorris]

The current topic is price fixing.
Internet providers pay the politicians for a government enforced monopoly so they can set prices without effective competition in a market.
Movie studios use 90s Microsoft style tactics to exploit and maintain artificially high prices.

At bankrate.com, I see dozens of banks competing on price. Certainly some in the scumbags are in the financial sector, and many offer services that aren't easy to understand, but where's the price fixing by banks? Not to say there isn't any, but where? The big issue I've seen with banks is that they loaned a lot of money to people who couldn't afford to repay the loans. In the beginning they were forced to by the government, but when they figured out how to resell the bad loans at a profit, they continued doing so voluntarily.

Re:internet yes, movies, yes, but banks ?

[noh8rz8]

libor. rate fixing to make borrowing more expensive and lending more profitable.

The prison sentences 1 year to 2 years to be exact

[dicobalt]

... but if I were to rob a bank or steal expensive objects worth millions I wold be in prison for 20 years.

Re:Asset forfeiture

[drinkypoo]

Yes, because making it profitable to arrest someone is such a good idea. What could possibly go wrong?

That's already how it is. The state gets to seize anything used in the commission of a crime. The ability to seize property (both land and otherwise) is one of the big motivators for states to participate in the War On Personal Freedom (aka the War On Drugs.) What could possibly go wrong is selective enforcement, and not seizing these particlar ill-gotten gains is a prime example thereof. Bill Gates' fortune is another. Now it's been sunk into a tax dodge and is being used to spread restrictive IP laws like TRIPS.

Prison is being misused

[FuzzNugget]

I really think prison is being misused by most of the world, especially the United States.

I believe it should only ever be used to separate the most extremely, immediately, physically and irremediably dangerous from the rest of us to keep society safe. I'm talking about murderers, rapists, violent assailants, the kind of people who commit extreme acts and intend to keep doing them. Putting the drug dealers and possessors, scammers, petty thieves, civil disputers, drunks, the negligent and so on costs us more than benefits.

This euphemism of "paying your debt to society" by spending time in a cement box always elicits uproarious laughter from me ... how is someone paying their debt when we're the ones footing the bill for their room and board??

Prison should never be about "paying your debt", not that it's even possible in that manner. If we want people to "pay their debt", garnish their wages and have them pay back the *exact people against whom they committed the acts*. If that's not enough, put them in community service or other work programs, where they'll actually be performing work that will repay society, not cost it.

Of course, there are underlying societal problems (poverty, increasing class inequality, antagonistic political attitudes, inadequate healthcare for the mentally ill) that are deeply rooted in reasons we send people to prison. It's just so much easier to throw them in a box than it is to address the real problems at their core. Law, it seems, has grown into this trolling monster that exists only to perpetuate itself while falsely purporting to serve the public.

Re:Prison is being misused

[drinkypoo]

Sadly, The People respond positively when it is announced that "criminals" have been imprisoned for their "crimes" almost regardless of why. In general there is a tendency to believe that they wouldn't have locked them up unless they were dangerous. But there are at least two obvious retorts, the first of which is that it is profitable to have a large machine which employs people in the pursuit of locking people up, and the second of which being that people who look for danger find it everywhere, and it's easy to get carried away even (or perhaps especially) when acting with the best of intentions.

Foreign Companies

[runeghost]

Obviously, they haven't mastered the fine American art of purchasing politicans and judges.