413
submitted 9 months ago by morrowind@lemmy.ml to c/news@lemmy.world
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[-] Reverendender@sh.itjust.works 86 points 9 months ago

And immediate consequences will result for the violators I assume?

[-] Wooster@startrek.website 48 points 9 months ago

I just read the joint legal brief, and, I have to say up front that I am not remotely a lawyer… but the document specifies how and where to identify price fixing, and that motions to dismiss those charges are to be dismissed.

So it doesn't dictate the penalties for price fixing (I assume that's on a trial by trial basis—but again, not a lawyer), but it makes it impossible(?) to ignore, and suggests that (to me), users of 'RENTMaximizer' will be in the crosshairs… while not actually stating that.

[-] Reverendender@sh.itjust.works 30 points 9 months ago

Thanks, friend. My optimism has increased by 3-5%. It now sits at 3-5%. (Seriously, thanks though. That's some quality researching)

[-] Tangent5280@lemmy.world 7 points 9 months ago

There will be an investigation into the algorithms you use to estimate optimism, to make sure you do not collude with Hopelords to inflate optimism quotients and rob hopees through conspiracy. Do not resist.

[-] tryptaminev@feddit.de 15 points 9 months ago

Does penalties in this case also mean compensation of the renters, whose wealth has been potentially robbed through illegal practices?

[-] Wooster@startrek.website 6 points 9 months ago

Mm… again not a lawyer, but I think that question goes beyond the scope of the document.

It basically gives the government permission to hold renters accountable for using software to artificially raise prices. What form that accountability takes is not addressed. Either that’s covered under existing collusion laws or is up to the courts.

So, it’s an essential ingredient to the cake that you’re describing… but unless prosecution (or whatever the term actually is) brings that up (I assume?), it won’t happen.

[-] Witchfire@lemmy.world 1 points 9 months ago

Only if you have the legal funds to take a landlord megacorp to court

[-] halcyoncmdr@lemmy.world 15 points 9 months ago
[-] FiniteBanjo@lemmy.today 6 points 9 months ago* (last edited 9 months ago)

Lots of people act like justice never comes from the Federal government to corporations, as if FaceBook isn't paying Billions in FTC fines for the next 2 decades. Punishments get dolled out all the time, but nobody talks about it.

[-] go_go_gadget@lemmy.world 4 points 9 months ago* (last edited 9 months ago)

Why would people care? Even if we assume the fine isn't so trivial it's just a cost of doing business people don't get that money nor does the federal government turn around and say "Good news everyone this means we can afford universal healthcare now!"

[-] FiniteBanjo@lemmy.today 3 points 9 months ago

Even if it's not as good as a criminal prosecution, it definitely does a lot to keep for profit companies in line. Without these various fines and rulings, the world would be a much worse place.

[-] Ensign_Crab@lemmy.world 1 points 9 months ago

Even if it's not as good as a criminal prosecution, it definitely does a lot to keep for profit companies in line.

Does it? Because gestures broadly at the entire economy.

[-] FiniteBanjo@lemmy.today 2 points 9 months ago* (last edited 9 months ago)

Let us look at an example where this sort of regulation was in place, and then went away:

In March 2014, Abbott lobbied to delay implementations of and even remove FDA Regulations on baby formula which would require more frequent inspections (and therefor fines), citing that the company was already morally and monetarily incentivized to control the quality of product without the need of oversight.

Abbott Baby Formula facility in Sturgis, Michigan, was linked to the infection of 5 infants and death of 2 infants, and revealed to have shipped untested batches of formula with falsified reports from management. This lead to the inevitable shutdown of the entire facility and following nationwide shortage of infant formula.

So, yes, fining companies to keep them in line is working when the alternative is that the unchecked corporations do things so catastrophically stupid that they run their own businesses into the ground.

[-] Ensign_Crab@lemmy.world 2 points 9 months ago

So, yes, fining companies to keep them in line is working when the alternative is that the unchecked corporations do things so catastrophically stupid that they run their own businesses into the ground.

I submit that such circumstances are rare, and that the usual case is that fines are a tiny fraction of the money companies being in by breaking the law.

[-] FiniteBanjo@lemmy.today 2 points 9 months ago

Sure, I never argued otherwise.

[-] Ensign_Crab@lemmy.world 1 points 9 months ago

So, as before:

gestures broadly at entire economy

[-] FiniteBanjo@lemmy.today 2 points 9 months ago* (last edited 9 months ago)

Actually, as before it was:

Does it? Because gestures broadly at the entire economy

And the answer to that was yes. Fines serve a purpose.

[-] Ensign_Crab@lemmy.world 1 points 9 months ago

Yeah, the purpose they serve is to set a cost for breaking the law that is almost always lower than the profits gained by doing so.

In order to encourage the economy we have.

this post was submitted on 03 Mar 2024
413 points (100.0% liked)

News

23634 readers
2381 users here now

Welcome to the News community!

Rules:

1. Be civil


Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban. Do not respond to rule-breaking content; report it and move on.


2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.


Obvious right or left wing sources will be removed at the mods discretion. We have an actively updated blocklist, which you can see here: https://lemmy.world/post/2246130 if you feel like any website is missing, contact the mods. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted seperately but not to the post body.


3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.


Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.


4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source.


Posts which titles don’t match the source won’t be removed, but the autoMod will notify you, and if your title misrepresents the original article, the post will be deleted. If the site changed their headline, the bot might still contact you, just ignore it, we won’t delete your post.


5. Only recent news is allowed.


Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.


6. All posts must be news articles.


No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials or celebrity gossip is allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis.


7. No duplicate posts.


If a source you used was already posted by someone else, the autoMod will leave a message. Please remove your post if the autoMod is correct. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.


8. Misinformation is prohibited.


Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.


9. No link shorteners.


The auto mod will contact you if a link shortener is detected, please delete your post if they are right.


10. Don't copy entire article in your post body


For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS