Hacker News new | comments | show | ask | jobs | submit login

The DOJ was investigating antitrust concerns, which is a civil matter (and a rather controversial area of the law).

The OP was discussing the criminal liability of corporations and their officers. That's a huge difference.

It's also a criminal matter, but that has nothing to do with my original post. It's certainly not "completely legal".

The penalties for violating the Sherman Act can be severe. Although most enforcement actions are civil, the Sherman Act is also a criminal law, and individuals and businesses that violate it may be prosecuted by the Department of Justice. Criminal prosecutions are typically limited to intentional and clear violations such as when competitors fix prices or rig bids. The Sherman Act imposes criminal penalties of up to $100 million for a corporation and $1 million for an individual, along with up to 10 years in prison.

Anyway, the other poster was correct. If they don't go to prison over this, the laws are wrong ;) And yes, of course I'm aware that they won't. That's exactly what I was lamenting.

Ok, fair point.

I'll just note that antitrust law is rather controversial, and is often enforced on purely political grounds. You'll recall Microsoft's (non) punishment after the last Republican administration was elected, for example.

I am well aware.

This does not change that pretty much everyone here but you thinks this was a bunch of crooked shit.

Given by the upvote/downvote ratio on my recent posts, I don't think that's clear cut.

I do think the visible reaction is fascinating given this is a site dedicated to growing businesses that almost certainly will conduct such practices (completely legally, too).

Guidelines | FAQ | Support | API | Security | Lists | Bookmarklet | DMCA | Apply to YC | Contact