Ebay sent cockroaches and Spiders to people..

[gabe101907]

this was a while back, ebay was found guilty of sending cockroaches and spiders to people( who I assume had held there feet to the fire). anyway fyi, this is the kinda people yer dealing with..

[vintagecraze50]

---

@valueaddedresource wrote:

---

@broto_64 wrote:

But "ebay" didn't "do" anything because it can't.
If ALL employees, if every single person that works with at or has anything to do with ebay left the building...
No sellers got online, no buyers did, as in absolutely nobody would interact or have anything at all to do with ebay... At this point, what would "ebay" do?
Nothing.

Because ebay is an "it."
Ebay is not a person.

It is a corporation, there exists a building, a street may have been named after it, there's a sign outside and there is paperwork and computers and servers but in and of itself ebay is not capable of action.

It is too bad the DOJ is so shortsighted as to accuse an actual corporation of wrong doing when in fact it is the people that interacted with it that are guilty of misconduct, but if it makes you feel any better guess who is paying for all that?
We are.

The buyers, the sellers, the employees.
That is who pays for these lawsuits.

There is absolutely nothing learned from punishing the "Inc."

---

@broto_64  "But 'ebay' didn't 'do' anything because it can't." - I don't know what to tell you except that's not how current US laws and regulations regarding corporations work, as shown in everything I said in the previous post.

As far as understanding the difference between a corporation and a person - you do get that I'm not talking about my personal feelings or opinions about corporate personhood, but the current reality of US laws and regulations right?

eBay as a company had certain duties in regard to internal policies, procedures, training and hiring practices, supervision of employees etc. eBay the company failed in those duties and is liable for the conduct of its employees (by its own admission in the deferred prosecution agreement) which is why it has been charged criminally and been named in the civil lawsuit regarding these events in addition to charges and claims brought against the individuals involved at various levels.

And again I must note that eBay the company itself doesn't even argue that it is not liable for the things it explicitly admitted to as part of the deferred prosecution deal - so I'm really not sure why you would continue to assert that the company "didn't do anything" when it has already admitted under oath and accepted liability/financial and compliance consequences for at least some of "its conduct", ie. stuff the company did or should have done but failed to do.

Multiple shareholder rights law firms also have ongoing investigations and interest in these cases for the same reason - eBay the company has fiduciary duties to shareholders that may have also been breached in this matter (and other legal issues the company is currently dealing with).

And no, none of what you said makes me feel any better, nor does it negate any of the points I've already made about the actual legal and regulatory issues involved here.

---

Liz, Ebay IS responsible for their employee’s. The only slight out they might have had was to prove these people acted against THEIR OWN better judgement and against the corporate policies and went on their own with no direction from a higher up[ to do what they did. Even then, they acted within the companies infrastructure. If companies are not held liable for their employees then there could be all kinds of illegal activity or worse going on.

[gone.c-33]

To be fair there IS all kind of illegal activity going on in all big corporations, we just choose to turn a blind eye because end stage capitalism.

[broto_64]

---

@valueaddedresource wrote:

---

@broto_64 wrote:

But "ebay" didn't "do" anything because it can't.
If ALL employees, if every single person that works with at or has anything to do with ebay left the building...
No sellers got online, no buyers did, as in absolutely nobody would interact or have anything at all to do with ebay... At this point, what would "ebay" do?
Nothing.

Because ebay is an "it."
Ebay is not a person.

It is a corporation, there exists a building, a street may have been named after it, there's a sign outside and there is paperwork and computers and servers but in and of itself ebay is not capable of action.

It is too bad the DOJ is so shortsighted as to accuse an actual corporation of wrong doing when in fact it is the people that interacted with it that are guilty of misconduct, but if it makes you feel any better guess who is paying for all that?
We are.

The buyers, the sellers, the employees.
That is who pays for these lawsuits.

There is absolutely nothing learned from punishing the "Inc."

---

@broto_64  "But 'ebay' didn't 'do' anything because it can't." - I don't know what to tell you except that's not how current US laws and regulations regarding corporations work, as shown in everything I said in the previous post.

As far as understanding the difference between a corporation and a person - you do get that I'm not talking about my personal feelings or opinions about corporate personhood, but the current reality of US laws and regulations right?

---

No, you are talking about "ebay" as if it was a person.

[valueaddedresource]

---

@broto_64 wrote:

---

---

No, you are talking about "ebay" as if it was a person.

---

@broto_64 I am talking about eBay exactly the same way the US Department of Justice, the judges in both the civil and criminal cases involving the cyberstalking scandal, the DEA and EPA in their respective recent lawsuits against the company, the SEC, the FTC and many other legal, regulatory and stakeholder/financial interests talk about eBay.

Again, to be clear, I am not expressing my personal feelings or opinions about the general concept of corporate personhood nor am I interested in debating the over 200 years of history and legal precedent just in the US alone on this topic.

I get it, you don't think corporations are people. You have every right to that opinion, but until/unless you are successful in changing how current US laws, regulations and courts view the subject, it's just not particularly relevant to a discussion of what has happened so far in these specific cases.

[chapeau-noir]

@broto_64  It's legally "corporate personhood". It's a concept dating back to the middle ages, but in the US, judicial opinion has invoked the 14th amendment's equal protection clause to grant constitutional protections to corporations.

Unfortunately, this gave birth to that monster known as Citizens United.

[valueaddedresource]

---

@chapeau-noir wrote:

@broto_64  It's legally "corporate personhood". It's a concept dating back to the middle ages, but in the US, judicial opinion has invoked the 14th amendment's equal protection clause to grant constitutional protections to corporations.

Unfortunately, this gave birth to that monster known as Citizens United.

---

Thanks @chapeau-noir!

For those unfamiliar with the term/concept, Wikipedia has at least a basic outline and I'm sure those who are interested can find other resources and references from there.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Corporate_personhood

Corporate personhood or juridical personality is the legal notion that a juridical person such as a corporation, separately from its associated human beings (like owners, managers, or employees), has at least some of the legal rights and responsibilities enjoyed by natural persons. In most countries, a corporation has the same rights as a natural person to hold property, enter into contracts, and to sue or be sued...

...Legislation in the United States

Federal statutes that refer to "persons" generally include both natural and juridical ones, unless a different definition is given. This general rule of interpretation is specified in Title 1, section 1 of the U.S. Code,[18] known as the Dictionary Act, which states:

In determining the meaning of any Act of Congress, unless the context indicates otherwise—

the words "person" and "whoever" include corporations, companies, associations, firms, partnerships, societies, and joint stock companies, as well as individuals;

This federal statute has many consequences. For example, a corporation may enter contracts, sue and be sued, and be held liable under both civil and criminal law.  Because the corporation is legally considered the "person", individual shareholders are not legally responsible for the corporation's debts and damages. 

There's certainly plenty of room to question and debate some of the applications and decisions over the years (your mention of Citizen's United for instance).

But in general, regardless of my personal thoughts on the concept of corporate personhood, at the very least I wouldn't call the DOJ's decision to bring criminal charges against eBay, the company, for its conduct in this situation (in line with 200+ years of US legal precedent and history that goes back much further) short-sighted. 😉

[soh.maryl]

Since eBay sells NOTHING and ships NOTHING, hard to understand how they could manage to ship ANYTHING to ANYONE.

I did not read the original story, however.  

[chapeau-noir]

Yes, on the other side of the Citizens United coin is the fact that the corporation also cannot unload its responsibility for their corporate culture (in this case immature bro) nor the fact that the buck stops at the CEO's desk when things happen on his/her watch, by scapegoating individual employees.

[chapeau-noir]

---

@soh.maryl wrote:

Since eBay sells NOTHING and ships NOTHING, hard to understand how they could manage to ship ANYTHING to ANYONE.

I did not read the original story, however.  

---

?

[valueaddedresource]

---

@soh.maryl wrote:

Since eBay sells NOTHING and ships NOTHING, hard to understand how they could manage to ship ANYTHING to ANYONE.

I did not read the original story, however.  

---

@soh.maryl this has nothing to do with how the eBay marketplace normally operates in the course of business as far as whether eBay is selling/shipping anything or simply acting as "just a venue".

In this case, eBay security personnel ordered various items like bugs, a bloody pig mask, a funeral wreath and book on surviving the death of a spouse, a dead preserved fetal pig (thankfully this one was not actually delivered), adult videos/material, etc. from various businesses and had those items shipped directly to the victims as part of a cyberstalking and harassment campaign.

[mam98031]

---

@gone.c-33 wrote:

To be fair there IS all kind of illegal activity going on in all big corporations, we just choose to turn a blind eye because end stage capitalism.

---

Blanket statements are rarely true.  There is no way you could possible know that to be a fact.  You are assuming because you may not like certain things any corporation does, that doesn't make it illegal.  Assumptions are not facts.

[gone.c-33]

Wage theft, OSHA violations, various types of workplace discrimination and other labor violations are rampant in big corporations.

No multibillion corporations has clean hands. I’ll stand behind that blanket statement anytime, anywhere.

[mam98031]

---

@gone.c-33 wrote:

Wage theft, OSHA violations, various types of workplace discrimination and other labor violations are rampant in big corporations.

No multibillion corporations has clean hands. I’ll stand behind that blanket statement anytime, anywhere.

---

That happens, I'm sure of it.  But that doesn't mean it happens in every single Corporation.

Your entitled to your opinion, it is just highly unlikely to be true.  Especially since there is no way you could know the inter workings of millions of corporations.

According to taxfoundation.org, the United States has 1.7 million traditional C corporations, 7.4 million partnerships and S corporations, and 23 million sole proprietorships. In 2019, the U.S. had 6,102,412 businesses that met the criteria for employee ownership.

[campanaelia]

---

@gone.c-33 wrote:

Wage theft, OSHA violations, various types of workplace discrimination and other labor violations are rampant in big corporations.

No multibillion corporations has clean hands. I’ll stand behind that blanket statement anytime, anywhere.

---

How can that be happening after trillions of dollars in tax cuts for those "job creators" since Reagan, employees should be treated like gold by now. You mean after 40 years of trickle down economics they were lying?

[chapeau-noir]

---

@campanaelia wrote:

---

@gone.c-33 wrote:

Wage theft, OSHA violations, various types of workplace discrimination and other labor violations are rampant in big corporations.

No multibillion corporations has clean hands. I’ll stand behind that blanket statement anytime, anywhere.

---

How can that be happening after trillions of dollars in tax cuts for those "job creators" since Reagan, employees should be treated like gold by now. You mean after 40 years of trickle down economics they were lying?

---

That's about right.