

EBay v. Newmark: Corporations Are Legally Required To Maximize Profits - brlewis
http://www.litigationandtrial.com/2010/09/articles/the-law/for-lawyers/ebay-v-newmark-al-franken-was-right-corporations-are-legally-required-to-maximize-profits/

======
markstansbury
I'll repeat the commentary I left on Kennerly's blog (which is always a great
read, by the way):

\------- This debate is fascinating.

Conservative commentators like Bainbridge et al should be taking the stance
that eBay loses this case because an investor takes the company he invests in,
poison pills, staggered board--presumably minimized profit aspirations--and
all. More-liberal commenatators on the other hand should be crying foul at the
blatant shareholder disenfranchisement. But those roles are reversed. Which
just goes to show how weak legal arguments are in the face of moral instinct:

Disenfranchisement is okay--you take the company you invest in--when the
company is doing something good. Minority-shareholder activism is okay--you
aren't bound by pre-existing rules--when the shareholder is trying to do
something good.

------
brlewis
Be aware of this if you incorporate and take investment.

