Yep! Every tech CEO I’ve worked with has a mentality of “It’s just the cost of doing business.” Since if they get fined, it’s smaller than the profits they made. Or even better, many don’t get fined and it’s all profits!
As it stands - companies are punished for following the law.
I partially agree, but 100% of revenue is still a loss. The R&D, employee pay, rent for facilities, and cost of input resources are still negative. 100% of profit would only encourage it still, but 100% of revenue is potentially a pretty strong punishment.
I’d be happy with 1.1x, 1.2x revenue. They would loose our on development costs too. The only thing not recouped is any gain in brand recognition etc. Make them send a message to all of their customers, and take ads out informing the public how they broke the law, misled them etc.
The article also states the settlement will go to refunding the defrauded customers. This needs to be the standard when prosecuting public harm of a business.
It has to be more than every cent. That would still incentivize cheating since at worst it is a wash for them. Given they do not come close to getting 100% of offenders, the five needs to be multiples. It’s like fare enforcement on subways and light rail. If you skip paying, you’ll likely get away with it for a while. But overall, the five will cost you slightly more than if you would have just played by the rules.
Every cent made is a fine I want to see more of. Anything less is going to be seen as just the cost of doing business and the behavior will continue.
No, it should be 3x revenue, IMO it’s not enough to just get that money back, it should cause some hurt on top of it.
Yep! Every tech CEO I’ve worked with has a mentality of “It’s just the cost of doing business.” Since if they get fined, it’s smaller than the profits they made. Or even better, many don’t get fined and it’s all profits!
As it stands - companies are punished for following the law.
Interesting too how that “cost of doing business” is basically money they don’t receive as opposed to money they actually have to pay
Similarly, for rich people, a parking ticket isn’t an imposition; it’s simply what it costs to park there.
I partially agree, but 100% of revenue is still a loss. The R&D, employee pay, rent for facilities, and cost of input resources are still negative. 100% of profit would only encourage it still, but 100% of revenue is potentially a pretty strong punishment.
If it’s imposed 100% of the times they do it
I’d be happy with 1.1x, 1.2x revenue. They would loose our on development costs too. The only thing not recouped is any gain in brand recognition etc. Make them send a message to all of their customers, and take ads out informing the public how they broke the law, misled them etc.
Because we all know they are only catching the tip of the iceberg anyway
The article also states the settlement will go to refunding the defrauded customers. This needs to be the standard when prosecuting public harm of a business.
It has to be more than every cent. That would still incentivize cheating since at worst it is a wash for them. Given they do not come close to getting 100% of offenders, the five needs to be multiples. It’s like fare enforcement on subways and light rail. If you skip paying, you’ll likely get away with it for a while. But overall, the five will cost you slightly more than if you would have just played by the rules.