Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

So basically zero repercussions for judges and law enforcement that swear and sign vastly incorrect orders that do drastic damage. Just like that article the other day where there are no repercussions for badly behaving prosecutors.

I guess at least they didn't kill anyone like a no-knock warrant on the wrong house for the wrong reason. Still, it's the general attitude that really should wake up people who have blind faith.



A better course of action may be prosecution of the RIAA under RICO statutes as they have caused damage of the property of others for claims which are false and which they ought to have known were false. They do offer 'protection' from these issues in exchange for 'licensing' fees. And it's clear that the record company execs have conspired to create such an organization.

This would create far more change than the prosecution of some low level bureaucrats, as RICO statues would allow the prosecution of the executives rather than lower level employees, as well as piercing the corporate veil to go after the record company execs rather than just RIAA execs.

The nice thing is that RICO allows for a civil claim where the evidentiary standards would be greatly relaxed, also a civil claim could not be quashed by reason of 'public interest'.


We can only dream. It'd be nice if everyone, corporations, politicians, and individuals, were held to account equally and were treated equally under the law. Unfortunately, that's not the world we live in.


It seems that the only way to actually be able to give those officials any form of repercussions would be to actually sue the government for damages.

I sincerely hope that the affected parties do sue the government successfully.


Except what happens then? Damages are paid out of the taxpayers' wallets.

It still leaves the problem of zero repercussions for the officials involved.

Now, if the officials themselves could be personally sued...


> Now, if the officials themselves could be personally sued...

I would really like to see immunity removed from government officials. The ostensible rationale for immunity is that you don't want government officials afraid that they'll be sued if the exercise discretion. But I that's exactly what you do want. If an official's actions can have a huge impact on people's lives, that official should feel that he'd better be right in his acts or that there will be repercussions for him personally -- just like in the private sector.


If you fuck up in a way that costs your department money, you get yelled at... even in the government. Each government department is not given full access to all of the money that the government has available; they have a budget, and that's all they get. If the budget is spent being sued for incompetence, that comes right out of your raise. In theory.


Officials can be personally sued if they were exceeding the bounds of their official duties.

We don't allow officials to be sued for official actions for many, many reasons, not the least of which is that it would effectively render enforcement impossible.




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: