Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

SoylentNews is people

posted by on Tuesday October 25 2016, @11:45PM   Printer-friendly
from the money-for-something dept.

According to the blog post, the trial ended on October 3rd, and investigators found that more than 100 people, including former ministers, the mayor of Bucharest, and various businessmen were involved in this latest corruption scandal involving Microsoft. More than 20 million euros were paid by Microsoft there as bribes. The blog post goes on to say that:

The Romanian court ruled in March 2016 with sentences for 8 years of prison and 9 million euros of asset forfeiture for the 4 persons on the picture [sic]. These sentences were appealed and October 3rd the High Court of Cessation and Justice (HCCJ) confirmed the guilt and increased the sentences to 14 years in prison and 17 million euros of asset forfeiture for these same persons.

Intellinews and The EUObserver have more detail on this story.

These bribery convictions are just the tip of the iceberg. Multiple news outlets are reporting on investigations of bribery in other countries as well as separate investigations by the US Department of Justice and the US Securities And Exchange Commission.


Original Submission

This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Display Options Threshold/Breakthrough Mark All as Read Mark All as Unread
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
  • (Score: 3, Insightful) by Thexalon on Tuesday October 25 2016, @11:47PM

    by Thexalon (636) on Tuesday October 25 2016, @11:47PM (#418767)

    Don't they know to always include the regulatory agency bureaucrats, prosecutors' offices, and judges on the list of bribe recipients?

    --
    The only thing that stops a bad guy with a compiler is a good guy with a compiler.
  • (Score: 3, Insightful) by Runaway1956 on Wednesday October 26 2016, @12:26AM

    by Runaway1956 (2926) Subscriber Badge on Wednesday October 26 2016, @12:26AM (#418779) Journal

    MS offers licensing deals to OEM's, if and only if that OEM promises to build ONLY Microsoft machines. Those deals have been known about for decades.

    In more sophisticated circles, that is known as a "kickback". The only reason it has appeared to pass muster is, it's a corporate deal, between corporations. No individual person has been known to line his own pockets with the proceeds. But, it's still a kickback.

    • (Score: 2) by Zz9zZ on Wednesday October 26 2016, @12:46AM

      by Zz9zZ (1348) on Wednesday October 26 2016, @12:46AM (#418784)

      Welcome to the US of A, where corruption is more of a *technical* situation.

      --
      ~Tilting at windmills~
    • (Score: 4, Informative) by frojack on Wednesday October 26 2016, @02:39AM

      by frojack (1554) on Wednesday October 26 2016, @02:39AM (#418822) Journal

      MS offers licensing deals to OEM's, if and only if that OEM promises to build ONLY Microsoft machines. Those deals have been known about for decades.

      Actually that's not true. Those deals were NEVER exactly as you think.

      Having worked for a OEM for a while, I can say with certainty (since I was the guy who had to research this) that no such requirement is imposed. We built MANY MANY linux machines as well as Servers running Netware, or Linux. (Mostly Suse SLES).

      In exchange for the lower price of copies of Windows, (which we had to purchase in bulk) we had to state that we Recommend Windows, but we didn't have to EXCLUSIVELY recommend windows, (and we published recommendations of Netware and Suse for servers).

      Dell and HP both made Linux machines for a while. Some with RedHat pre-installed.

      --
      No, you are mistaken. I've always had this sig.
      • (Score: 2) by Runaway1956 on Wednesday October 26 2016, @06:48AM

        by Runaway1956 (2926) Subscriber Badge on Wednesday October 26 2016, @06:48AM (#418882) Journal

        That is informative. There is no "quota" or anything? That is, if you were to sell 80% competing OS's instead of MS, you didn't get charged significantly more for your next stack of licenses?

        • (Score: 2) by frojack on Wednesday October 26 2016, @07:06AM

          by frojack (1554) on Wednesday October 26 2016, @07:06AM (#418883) Journal

          The discounts for volume are steep, STEEP.
          The Dells and the HPs of the world were basically paying nothing for consumer windows licenses. Nothing at all.
          Small fry operators were paying 25% and down.

          --
          No, you are mistaken. I've always had this sig.
      • (Score: 3, Informative) by RamiK on Wednesday October 26 2016, @11:49AM

        by RamiK (1813) on Wednesday October 26 2016, @11:49AM (#418934)

        Those deals were NEVER exactly as you think.

        Read page 3 in http://www.stern.nyu.edu/networks/Microsoft_Antitrust.final.pdf [nyu.edu] .

        Microsoft and the DOJ struck a deal during 94-95 to forgo further litigation if MS sign the consent letter stating they'll stop forcing OEMs into exclusivity deals.

        --
        compiling...
  • (Score: 4, Interesting) by PartTimeZombie on Wednesday October 26 2016, @12:56AM

    by PartTimeZombie (4827) on Wednesday October 26 2016, @12:56AM (#418787)

    I work for a US company, and every year as part of my training, I have to go through the details of the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act [wikipedia.org]

    The stupid training states that as the company is US owned, I am bound by the act, which is total bullshit as I don't live there and have never even visited the place.
    I always assume that it just means that if I'm caught doing anything naughty I will be thrown under the bus so the company can claim they didn't know what was going on.
    It will be the same with Microsoft, they will claim they knew nothing and it was a bunch of rogue partners. Microsoft has paid an awful lot in campaign contributions over the last few years, so don't expect any meaningful punishments.

    • (Score: 3, Informative) by frojack on Wednesday October 26 2016, @03:01AM

      by frojack (1554) on Wednesday October 26 2016, @03:01AM (#418826) Journal

      Chances are the practices forbidden to the US company are those practices that are outlawed by YOUR COUNTRY, even if nobody in your own country follows those laws.

      For instance, bribes are common place in south/central america and much of asia. They are also illegal in those places. In most places the local firms get away with the bribes, with a wink and a nod.

      China has started executing people for bribery. So far, its only their own people getting shot.

         

      --
      No, you are mistaken. I've always had this sig.
  • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday October 26 2016, @12:57AM

    by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday October 26 2016, @12:57AM (#418788)

    It's illegal for US firms to engage in bribery in foreign countries. Let the hammers drop.

    • (Score: 3, Insightful) by KilroySmith on Wednesday October 26 2016, @01:03AM

      by KilroySmith (2113) on Wednesday October 26 2016, @01:03AM (#418791)

      10 years from now, a $100 million dollar fine will be levied, that the CEO will dislodge from his shoe and pay.

      • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday October 26 2016, @01:25AM

        by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday October 26 2016, @01:25AM (#418796)

        There won't be Microsoft in 10 years.

        • (Score: 5, Funny) by MostCynical on Wednesday October 26 2016, @02:08AM

          by MostCynical (2589) on Wednesday October 26 2016, @02:08AM (#418813) Journal

          Where iz the +1 "delusionally optimistic" mod?

          --
          "I guess once you start doubting, there's no end to it." -Batou, Ghost in the Shell: Stand Alone Complex
        • (Score: 2) by cubancigar11 on Wednesday October 26 2016, @10:23AM

          by cubancigar11 (330) on Wednesday October 26 2016, @10:23AM (#418910) Homepage Journal

          People said something similar anout IBM. Then I was born.

    • (Score: 3, Interesting) by TheRaven on Wednesday October 26 2016, @02:09PM

      by TheRaven (270) on Wednesday October 26 2016, @02:09PM (#418981) Journal
      Someone pointed out a while ago that the best way to make bribery go away is to make giving a bribe totally legal, but have large penalties for receiving one. This means that anyone giving a bribe can then immediately turn around after it's been accepted and have the recipient indicted. It then means that receiving a bribe becomes a very dangerous activity - there's no mutually assured destruction, because it's completely legal for the person who gave you the bribe so you have no hold over them, but if you took it then you're immediately at a disadvantage.
      --
      sudo mod me up
  • (Score: 3, Funny) by frojack on Wednesday October 26 2016, @02:44AM

    by frojack (1554) on Wednesday October 26 2016, @02:44AM (#418824) Journal

    confirmed the guilt and increased the sentences to 14 years in prison and 17 million euros of asset forfeiture for these same persons.

    That'l teach them not to appeal this sentence again.

    --
    No, you are mistaken. I've always had this sig.
  • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday October 26 2016, @01:47PM

    by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday October 26 2016, @01:47PM (#418967)

    to be using an operating system that doesn't need millions of dollars of persuasion in bribes to use...

    Shame on these monopolists and the people who do business with them!

  • (Score: 2) by tisI on Wednesday October 26 2016, @02:18PM

    by tisI (5866) on Wednesday October 26 2016, @02:18PM (#418987)

    Everyone knows all elected scum, senators, congresscritters & even the POTUS, are all bought off by corporate bribes. When can we jail them?

    --
    "Suppose you were an idiot...and suppose you were a member of Congress...but I repeat myself."