Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

SoylentNews is people

posted by martyb on Monday September 16 2019, @11:08PM   Printer-friendly
from the A-Rose-By-Any-Other-Name dept.

https://www.bbc.com/news/business-49711618

In the face of thousands of lawsuits about the alleging abusive practices contributing to the opioid crisis in the US, Purdue Pharma (makers of OxiCotin) are filing Chapter 11 Bankruptcy protection. If the courts agree, this would allow them to restructure their debts and continue operations.

"Under the terms of the [proposed] deal, Purdue is to be dissolved and the money raised - estimated to be about $10bn-$12bn (£8bn-£9.7bn), including a minimum cash contribution of $3bn from the Sackler family - will go towards settling the lawsuits. The Sacklers have also offered an additional $1.5bn from the eventual sale of Mundipharma, another pharmaceutical firm owned by the family.

Several of the states that oppose the deal, such as New York, Connecticut and Massachusetts, have questioned how Purdue came up with the contribution figure.

The states want the Sackler family to put in more of its own money into the deal."

Note: Bankruptcy is not what regular people think it is. Similar to the "kill" command in Unix/Linux, there are lots of versions which may or may not do what people think. As an example, see: https://www.credit.com/debt/filing-for-bankruptcy-difference-between-chapters-7-11-13/


Original Submission

Related Stories

Sacklers Threaten to Scrap Opioid Deal If They Aren’t Shielded From Lawsuits 69 comments

Submitted via IRC for Bytram

Sacklers threaten to scrap opioid deal if they aren't shielded from lawsuits

Lawyers for OxyContin-maker Purdue Pharma filed a new complaint late Wednesday threatening that the company's mega-rich owners, the Sackler family, could pull out of a proposed multi-billion-dollar opioid settlement deal if a bankruptcy judge doesn't shield the family from outstanding state lawsuits.

Purdue's lawyers argue that if the lawsuits continue, the Sacklers will have to waste "hundreds of millions of dollars" on legal costs that could otherwise go to claimants in the settlement. The family's lawyers added that in that event, the family "may be unwilling—or unable—to make the billions of dollars of contributions" to the proposed settlement.

State attorneys general, however, argue that the tactic is yet another move designed to shield the Sacklers and their ill-gotten wealth.

"This filing isn't a surprise. It's yet another effort by Purdue to avoid accountability and shield the Sackler family fortune, and we will be opposing it," Maura Healey, the attorney general of Massachusetts, told the New York Times.

Related:


Original Submission

OxyContin Maker Purdue Pharma to Plead Guilty to Three Criminal Charges 67 comments

OxyContin Maker Purdue Pharma to Plead Guilty to Three Criminal Charges

OxyContin maker Purdue Pharma to plead guilty to 3 criminal charges as part of an $8 billion-plus settlement

WASHINGTON (AP) — Purdue Pharma, the company that makes OxyContin, the powerful prescription painkiller that experts say helped touch off an epidemic, will plead guilty to three federal criminal charges as part of a settlement of more than $8 billion, Justice Department officials told The Associated Press.

The company will plead guilty to a criminal information being filed Wednesday in federal court in New Jersey to three counts, including conspiracy to defraud the United States and violating federal anti-kickback laws, the officials said.

The deal does not release any of the company's executives or owners — members of the wealthy Sackler family — from criminal liability. A criminal investigation is ongoing.

The officials were not authorized to discuss the investigation publicly and spoke on condition of anonymity.

Also at: Business Insider, CBS News, and ABC News.

Guilty pleas? You seldom see that - these corporates always seem to get away with weasel word statements to the effect, "We acknowledge no wrongdoing blah blah blah . . . "

Purdue Pharma Pleads Guilty to Opioid Crisis Charges, Will Become a Public Benefit Corporation

OxyContin maker to plead guilty to federal criminal charges, pay $8 billion, and will close the company

Purdue Pharma, the maker of OxyContin, has agreed to plead guilty to three federal criminal charges for its role in creating the nation's opioid crisis and will pay more than $8 billion and close down the company.

The money will go to opioid treatment and abatement programs. The privately held company has agreed to pay a $3.5 billion fine as well as forfeit an additional $2 billion in past profits, in addition to the $2.8 billion it agreed to pay in civil liability.
"Purdue Pharma actively thwarted the United States' efforts to ensure compliance and prevent diversion," said Drug Enforcement Administration Assistant Administrator Tim McDermott. "The devastating ripple effect of Purdue's actions left lives lost and others addicted."

The company doesn't have $8 billion in cash available to pay the fines. So Purdue will be dissolved as part of the settlement, and its assets will be used to create a new "public benefit company" controlled by a trust or similar entity designed for the benefit of the American public. The Justice Department said it will function entirely in the public interest rather than to maximize profits. Its future earnings will go to paying the fines and penalties, which in turn will be used to combat the opioid crisis.

That new company will continue to produce painkillers such as OxyContin, as well as drugs to deal with opioid overdose. Deputy Attorney General Jeffrey Rosen, who announced the settlement, defended the plans for the new company to continue to sell that drug, saying there are legitimate uses for painkillers such as OxyContin.

Also at The New York Times, Bloomberg, NBC, and CBS.

Previously:


Original Submission


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.
(1)
  • (Score: 1, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Monday September 16 2019, @11:22PM (2 children)

    by Anonymous Coward on Monday September 16 2019, @11:22PM (#894874)

    C11 bankrupcy is to reorg and revive the outfit. Revive? Them fuckers (the management, the c-suite) belong in pound-in-the-ass fed pent!

    • (Score: 4, Insightful) by sjames on Tuesday September 17 2019, @01:45AM (1 child)

      by sjames (2882) on Tuesday September 17 2019, @01:45AM (#894946) Journal

      Put another way, it's a chance for the owners to transfer assets out and their personal debts in. That way it can wobble along just long enough to cover the tracks before it sinks to the depths taking the debt with it.

  • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday September 16 2019, @11:22PM

    by Anonymous Coward on Monday September 16 2019, @11:22PM (#894875)

    CEO: "Doc, the bankruptcy has given me a horrible migraine. I need some really really strong pain meds, please!"

  • (Score: 4, Insightful) by Azuma Hazuki on Monday September 16 2019, @11:28PM (27 children)

    by Azuma Hazuki (5086) on Monday September 16 2019, @11:28PM (#894881) Journal

    The only way this shit is going to stop is if the people who gain from it lose *everything.* Throw them in federal PMITA prison, *after* stripping every last cent from them.

    In fact, do them one better: remove every red penny they have, and then...let them go. Let them make their way in the world with no money at all, or try to. They'll be begging to be let into prison within a week. They may even end up addicted to opioids, which would be grimly, poetically hilarious.

    --
    I am "that girl" your mother warned you about...
    • (Score: 4, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Monday September 16 2019, @11:34PM (10 children)

      by Anonymous Coward on Monday September 16 2019, @11:34PM (#894887)

      Is prison rape ever an acceptable built-in punishment?

      Or more broadly, is a prison culture where you could be raped, stabbed, forced to join a gang, fear for your life, etc. acceptable?

      • (Score: 2, Offtopic) by Gaaark on Tuesday September 17 2019, @01:41AM (4 children)

        by Gaaark (41) on Tuesday September 17 2019, @01:41AM (#894943) Journal

        Is being a drug pusher making billions of dollars at peoples expense acceptable?
        Is ruining peoples lives acceptable?

        --
        --- Please remind me if I haven't been civil to you: I'm channeling MDC. ---Gaaark 2.0 ---
        • (Score: -1, Flamebait) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday September 17 2019, @01:53AM (3 children)

          by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday September 17 2019, @01:53AM (#894949)

          Those questions are not relevant to this thread.

          I want to know more about this notion of throwing them into "federal pound-me-in-the-ass prison" that Azuma supports.

          • (Score: 0, Flamebait) by Azuma Hazuki on Tuesday September 17 2019, @02:30AM (2 children)

            by Azuma Hazuki (5086) on Tuesday September 17 2019, @02:30AM (#894955) Journal

            "Hyuk hyuk hyuk, lookit me, I'mma expose me sum lib'rul hypocrisy hurrrrr~!"

            Stupid bastard. It's a figure of speech. But you know, since I tend to deal in eye-for-eye retribution, let me turn the tables on you with another question: how can these drug lords be made to properly suffer? I'd actually say that being stripped entirely of all assets and forced to live as minimum-wage retail peons for the rest of their lives might actually, in the aggregate, be *worse* punishment. Think of it as an area-under-the-curve question, to be extremely relevant to the subject of pharmaceuticals :)

            --
            I am "that girl" your mother warned you about...
            • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday September 17 2019, @07:40AM (1 child)

              by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday September 17 2019, @07:40AM (#895059)

              In the '60's, they said:

              God Damn, the pusher man!

              Same as it ever was. Azuma Hazuki is right on target with this one.

              • (Score: 2) by Gaaark on Tuesday September 17 2019, @12:31PM

                by Gaaark (41) on Tuesday September 17 2019, @12:31PM (#895107) Journal

                Except now, the 'pusher man' has power, money and influence: the war on drugs stops at his doorstep.

                --
                --- Please remind me if I haven't been civil to you: I'm channeling MDC. ---Gaaark 2.0 ---
      • (Score: 0, Flamebait) by Azuma Hazuki on Tuesday September 17 2019, @02:33AM (4 children)

        by Azuma Hazuki (5086) on Tuesday September 17 2019, @02:33AM (#894957) Journal

        Sorry? I see your lips moving in what look like English syllables, but all I hear is some variation on the theme of "Aur aur aur aur!" Who the hell let that sea lion in here?

        --
        I am "that girl" your mother warned you about...
        • (Score: -1, Troll) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday September 17 2019, @02:51AM (1 child)

          by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday September 17 2019, @02:51AM (#894968)

          Sounds like you need the PMITA treatment. And I'm not talking about a strap-on.

          • (Score: 1, Troll) by Azuma Hazuki on Wednesday September 18 2019, @12:31AM

            by Azuma Hazuki (5086) on Wednesday September 18 2019, @12:31AM (#895433) Journal

            It's PMITV in this case, thanks, and a strapon works perfectly for it :) Not that you're ever going to know one way or another. Your mother's was the first and last vagina you will ever get that close to, at least without the aid of drugs and/or weapons.

            --
            I am "that girl" your mother warned you about...
        • (Score: 2) by c0lo on Tuesday September 17 2019, @03:07AM

          by c0lo (156) Subscriber Badge on Tuesday September 17 2019, @03:07AM (#894972) Journal

          Chill, Azuma. Don't make spend another mod point telling you you're flamebiting, and excessively so.

          I'm able to read two valid questions that are not including anything personal; they can stand on their own no matter the context. What made you think those question are somehow an ad hominem directed to you?
          (Stressful times in your life? Sleep deficit? What?)

          --
          https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aoFiw2jMy-0 https://soylentnews.org/~MichaelDavidCrawford
        • (Score: 1, Insightful) by khallow on Tuesday September 17 2019, @01:00PM

          by khallow (3766) Subscriber Badge on Tuesday September 17 2019, @01:00PM (#895116) Journal
          I doubt anyone with a functioning brain had any trouble understanding that post. Your feigned inability to understand normal written English is just another brick in the wall.
    • (Score: 3, Informative) by PartTimeZombie on Monday September 16 2019, @11:36PM (7 children)

      by PartTimeZombie (4827) on Monday September 16 2019, @11:36PM (#894889)

      Unfortunately that is not how the world works.

      The Sackler family are doing everything they can to hide as much as they can [theguardian.com] before the courts can get hold of it.
      Will any of that money be recovered? I don't think so.
      That is why the Swiss banking system is still allowed to exist. Rich people need to keep money secret.

      • (Score: 1) by NickM on Tuesday September 17 2019, @12:11AM (3 children)

        by NickM (2867) on Tuesday September 17 2019, @12:11AM (#894903) Journal

        <tinfoil>
        The recent mysterious 1 billion usd worth of btc trx to an unknown wallet is starting to make sense
        </tinfoil>

        --
        I a master of typographic, grammatical and miscellaneous errors !
        • (Score: 2) by PartTimeZombie on Tuesday September 17 2019, @12:48AM (2 children)

          by PartTimeZombie (4827) on Tuesday September 17 2019, @12:48AM (#894923)

          Nice! I love a good conspiracy theory.

          • (Score: 2) by Azuma Hazuki on Tuesday September 17 2019, @02:41AM (1 child)

            by Azuma Hazuki (5086) on Tuesday September 17 2019, @02:41AM (#894961) Journal

            You know, at this point nothing like that would surprise me. We've long since jumped the shark, have gone from the sublime straight past the ridiculous and are screaming headlong down the abyss of Dadaist absurdity.

            --
            I am "that girl" your mother warned you about...
            • (Score: 3, Informative) by c0lo on Tuesday September 17 2019, @03:16AM

              by c0lo (156) Subscriber Badge on Tuesday September 17 2019, @03:16AM (#894975) Journal

              the abyss of Dadaist absurdity

              Pardon me, "de gustibus".
              I happen to find the Dadaist absurdity a sublime ancestor. I mean, it grandfathered something I imagine you('d) like [wikipedia.org]

              --
              https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aoFiw2jMy-0 https://soylentnews.org/~MichaelDavidCrawford
      • (Score: 2) by c0lo on Tuesday September 17 2019, @12:13AM (1 child)

        by c0lo (156) Subscriber Badge on Tuesday September 17 2019, @12:13AM (#894906) Journal

        That is why the Swiss banking system is still allowed to exist. Rich people need to keep money secret.

        Update what you know about banking secrecy.
        Start with the Common Reporting Standard [wikipedia.org] ("Its purpose is to combat tax evasion"). Note that Switzerland started to report in 2018 [wikipedia.org].

        In brief, Switzerland will no longer protect your data from an investigation involving financial crimes (note: the Purdue/Sackler family case may not fall into this category).

        If you want to see how the Switzerland bank secrecy evolved over time, read the Financial Secrecy Index'es Narrative report on Switzerland(PDF warning) [financialsecrecyindex.com].

        --
        https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aoFiw2jMy-0 https://soylentnews.org/~MichaelDavidCrawford
        • (Score: 2) by PartTimeZombie on Tuesday September 17 2019, @12:59AM

          by PartTimeZombie (4827) on Tuesday September 17 2019, @12:59AM (#894925)

          That was an interesting read, but the Common Reporting Standard still clashes with the Swiss Federal Act on Banks and Savings Banks:

          On January 6, 2018, the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York ruled that Swiss bankers "[have] nothing to do with the choice that an American taxpayer makes to not declare offshore assets."[33] This ruling sets a district court precedent that Swiss bankers should not be seen as facilitating tax evasion but rather providing a legal service that is made illegal by the client.[33]

          This Wikipedia article is full of quote like that. [wikipedia.org]

          Disclosing banking information is illegal in Switzerland, and that is not a new thing.

          If the Sackler family is sending money there, they have a very good reason to.

      • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday September 17 2019, @01:41AM

        by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday September 17 2019, @01:41AM (#894944)

        Seems we're left with the problem of power. Guillotines would be sufficient During their last 20 seconds of life as a blinking head, they will contemplate their choices (as they always urge us little people to).

    • (Score: 2) by JoeMerchant on Tuesday September 17 2019, @12:28AM (1 child)

      by JoeMerchant (3937) on Tuesday September 17 2019, @12:28AM (#894914)

      When you fall from that high, you tend to bounce pretty well, example: O.J. Simpson.

      --
      🌻🌻 [google.com]
      • (Score: 2) by Gaaark on Tuesday September 17 2019, @01:43AM

        by Gaaark (41) on Tuesday September 17 2019, @01:43AM (#894945) Journal

        Scum floats to the top of the swamp!

        --
        --- Please remind me if I haven't been civil to you: I'm channeling MDC. ---Gaaark 2.0 ---
    • (Score: 2) by Thexalon on Tuesday September 17 2019, @02:15AM

      by Thexalon (636) on Tuesday September 17 2019, @02:15AM (#894953)

      At the very least, they should be considered drug lords.

      --
      The only thing that stops a bad guy with a compiler is a good guy with a compiler.
    • (Score: 3, Insightful) by TheGratefulNet on Tuesday September 17 2019, @03:05AM (4 children)

      by TheGratefulNet (659) on Tuesday September 17 2019, @03:05AM (#894970)

      you forget rule #1 of How Things Really Work(tm).

      see, the ruling class never gets punished (not very hard). they have the 'authorities' in place to ensure THEIR safety during whatever will happen.

      the authorities are not there for you and me, the regular people. they have ALWAYS been there ONLY for the ruling classes.

      what, you think that real justice exists in the US?

      pfffft!

      kids should learn this real early. sooner they realize how things really work, the sooner SOME kind of change can be made.

      but this won't change. the whole system is setup by 'them' for 'them' and it goes quite deep.

      --
      "It is now safe to switch off your computer."
      • (Score: 2) by c0lo on Tuesday September 17 2019, @03:21AM (3 children)

        by c0lo (156) Subscriber Badge on Tuesday September 17 2019, @03:21AM (#894976) Journal

        see, the ruling class never gets punished (not very hard).

        Sometimes they conveniently get suicided [wikipedia.org], though.
        Otherwise, too high a risk of too many others in the ruling class being punished.

        --
        https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aoFiw2jMy-0 https://soylentnews.org/~MichaelDavidCrawford
        • (Score: 1, Interesting) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday September 17 2019, @05:06AM (2 children)

          by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday September 17 2019, @05:06AM (#895007)

          He was jumped-up new trash money without family or real friends who probably got his money via blackmail. The true 0.1% were happy to see him suicide-watched* while his few 'friends' were busy trying to hide any connections they had to him.

          *from wikipedia: Suicide-watch is an intensive monitoring process used to ensure that anyone except Jeffrey Epstein cannot attempt suicide.

          • (Score: -1, Flamebait) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday September 17 2019, @05:16AM

            by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday September 17 2019, @05:16AM (#895012)

            RMS is still loyal to Epstein ;)

          • (Score: 1) by khallow on Tuesday September 17 2019, @04:27PM

            by khallow (3766) Subscriber Badge on Tuesday September 17 2019, @04:27PM (#895242) Journal
            No True 0.1% would have been on the other of that fallacy!
  • (Score: 1, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Monday September 16 2019, @11:35PM (6 children)

    by Anonymous Coward on Monday September 16 2019, @11:35PM (#894888)

    Doesn't a doctor have end responsibility for what he prescribes medicine for?
    But doctors aren't as rich as the Sacklers...

    • (Score: 2) by Runaway1956 on Monday September 16 2019, @11:59PM (4 children)

      by Runaway1956 (2926) Subscriber Badge on Monday September 16 2019, @11:59PM (#894895) Journal

      Yes, doctors do have ultimate responsibility. Those doctors who overprescribed should be liable for and to their victims. That doesn't reduce the Sackler's responsibility though.

      • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday September 17 2019, @01:39AM (3 children)

        by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday September 17 2019, @01:39AM (#894942)

        What responsibility is that? To be the scapegoat with a checkbook for what rules of professional responsibility others have violated?

        • (Score: 3, Informative) by shortscreen on Tuesday September 17 2019, @03:13AM

          by shortscreen (2252) on Tuesday September 17 2019, @03:13AM (#894974) Journal

          Allegations are that Perdue misrepresented the safety and efficacy of their product and used illegal tactics to market it to doctors.

          Even though they weren't writing the prescriptions, there is a case to be made that they committed wrongdoing which played a role.

        • (Score: 2) by Runaway1956 on Tuesday September 17 2019, @01:40PM (1 child)

          by Runaway1956 (2926) Subscriber Badge on Tuesday September 17 2019, @01:40PM (#895134) Journal

          Shortscreen summed it up succinctly. Purdue was pushing their drugs. The doctor who made a quarter million in bonuses and rewards from Purdue should be in prison, most definitely. He should be sitting right beside the Sacklers, who were paying him those bonuses and rewards.

          • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday September 17 2019, @10:28PM

            by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday September 17 2019, @10:28PM (#895381)

            I *expect* the producing company to *push* their drugs. They aren't a charity, they are a business.

            Going to blame Seagram's for alcoholism?

    • (Score: 2) by All Your Lawn Are Belong To Us on Tuesday September 17 2019, @05:41PM

      by All Your Lawn Are Belong To Us (6553) on Tuesday September 17 2019, @05:41PM (#895288) Journal

      Prescribers have responsibility to adhere to the Standard of Care for a patient. If a licensed practitioner is told by, say, a pharmaceutical company that their product is less addictive than X,Y, and Z and therefore it should be prescribed over those substances, then they rely on that until either their personal work or peer reviewed sources say something different. If all Doctors, more or less, do that equally at a given time then that is the Standard of Care. That is what Perdue was accused of - promoting their opioids as being safer than what they had data to establish was correct. Not unleashing a live plague upon the land intentionally.

      Prescribers also have the responsibility to inform their patients that a substance is addictive (if it's an opioid or benzo for example), why it is being given, what potential side effects it may have, when to take it, that it is important to take it exactly as prescribed and not more or less than that (if it's an opioid or benzo), and to follow up that the patient does that and stops it as prescribed. In some states now prescribers have responsibility to check a state database of how many other schedule prescriptions the user has been given before deciding to issue an opioid prescription. They have a responsibility that if the patient is honest with the prescriber that they have become addicted to get that person treatment help - but by this point the patient most likely is actively lying to their prescriber if they have cut them off appropriately. And an intelligent prescriber is smart enough to know there are patients who can lie and fake it well enough to fool the prescriber yet also be able to make the call that they believe someone is being truthful and needs that level of help.

      They also, by the way, have a responsibility to try other things if the patient still reports intractable pain through the limits of what they can therapeutically do. And they have the responsibility to judge if a patient may be better served by something less strong then to do that.

      The problem with opioid prescription is that many of them start out for quite legitimate concerns. People can even take them and then stop them at a time, but later encounter life circumstances which have them start seeking out the effects the opioids gave them when they really needed them.

      This is all an evolution, though, from the days when pain was mostly ignored. "Your being in pain is less important than making sure you are recovering," was the mantra through the early 80s. Patient reports of pain were considered unreliable at best and often ignored. Then things changed to recognize that pain is subjective and it is hard to stack up two people with the same type of condition and universally say all persons in the same condition have the same pain - because they don't. So the pendulum swung to accepting whatever the patient reported is legitimate (more or less - some common sense prevailed for some providers). The goal was to have patients as pain-free as possible. Now the pendulum is swinging back a bit and requiring there be functional deficits in addition to the patient report of pain - what isn't the patient achieving because of the pain and what level of moderation will allow them to do that. There are still good and valid exceptions to this rule, namely cancer and most especially hospice care. I do hope if I live long enough to get there that pain I would have as a hospice patient will be well managed with whatever can help from the toolbox.

      --
      This sig for rent.
  • (Score: 3, Interesting) by Runaway1956 on Monday September 16 2019, @11:57PM (2 children)

    by Runaway1956 (2926) Subscriber Badge on Monday September 16 2019, @11:57PM (#894893) Journal

    If the courts agree, this would allow them to restructure

    Permission is key here. Some judge(s) have to be convinced that bankruptcy is permissible. I really don't think that bankruptcy was ever intended to make criminal charges go away. That is what we are talking about here, is criminal conduct. A drug pushing cartel used it's money and influence to push drugs onto unsuspecting dupes around the nation, with the complicity of the entire medical industry. Legal drugs or illegal, pushing drugs is wrong, morally, ethically, as well as legally.

    If the Sackoshites can't find any corrupt judges to grant permission for them to sidestep criminal responsibility, then chapter 11 won't happen.

    Alas, there are plenty of corrupt judges who can either be bought, or can use the case to advance an agenda somehow.

    • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday September 17 2019, @12:23AM

      by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday September 17 2019, @12:23AM (#894911)

      Bankruptcy will do 2 things... Prevent or limit criminal charges, and protect the billions of dollars those fuckers tunneled into their Swiss bank accounts.

    • (Score: 3, Interesting) by JoeMerchant on Tuesday September 17 2019, @12:31AM

      by JoeMerchant (3937) on Tuesday September 17 2019, @12:31AM (#894915)

      Bankruptcy is a way of protecting (hiding) assets from collection, whether debt or judgement. You basically throw yourself on the mercy of the bankruptcy judge, who, in this case, is most likely going to be bought off in some way by the poor struggling company that needs protection so they can continue their good work in the world. /s

      --
      🌻🌻 [google.com]
  • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday September 17 2019, @01:36AM (5 children)

    by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday September 17 2019, @01:36AM (#894941)

    How many people has chemo killed that got recorded as "cancer"?

    • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday September 17 2019, @02:02AM (2 children)

      by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday September 17 2019, @02:02AM (#894950)

      And how many people has man Jesus cured that got recorded as "remission"?

      • (Score: 2) by TheGratefulNet on Tuesday September 17 2019, @03:07AM (1 child)

        by TheGratefulNet (659) on Tuesday September 17 2019, @03:07AM (#894973)

        >And how many people has man Jesus cured that got recorded as "remission"?

        answer: square root of negative one

        --
        "It is now safe to switch off your computer."
        • (Score: 2) by c0lo on Tuesday September 17 2019, @03:26AM

          by c0lo (156) Subscriber Badge on Tuesday September 17 2019, @03:26AM (#894979) Journal

          >And how many people has man Jesus cured that got recorded as "remission"?

          answer: square root of negative one

          Your answer is.... eh... two pies away of going full circle.
          It makes me dizzy, I wanna get down.

          --
          https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aoFiw2jMy-0 https://soylentnews.org/~MichaelDavidCrawford
    • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday September 17 2019, @05:45PM (1 child)

      by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday September 17 2019, @05:45PM (#895291)

      Since the cancer existed first and without the chemo the person would have died: None.

      Absolutely true? No. But moreso than what you're implying.

      • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday September 17 2019, @11:26PM

        by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday September 17 2019, @11:26PM (#895406)

        So your choice is to either die in a couple years, or go bankrupt and die sooner. Just talk to some people who have seen loved ones go through chemo... many will tell you it is obvious what killed them.

  • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday September 17 2019, @04:25AM

    by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday September 17 2019, @04:25AM (#894988)

    When the rats run in masse following the tune an change nest.

  • (Score: 2) by hwertz on Tuesday September 17 2019, @06:10AM (2 children)

    by hwertz (8141) on Tuesday September 17 2019, @06:10AM (#895025)

    As far as I'm concerned, the Sackler family should have to put EVERYTHING into the deal.

    This isn't the usual misbehaving pharma company; per media reports, the Sacklers were caught dead to rights via E-Mail exchanges encouraging addiction. They set up sales contests, rewarding salesmen and pharmacists who they knew (via sales records showing number of pills sold going up far faster than number of patients buying) were getting people increasingly addicted to these pills. The Sacklers encouraged this, and when some employees brought up concerns about the clear sales to addicts, the replies quite crassly indicated increased sales and profits were their only concerns.

    The icing on the cake -- the treatment centers they started. Now, you could say "Well, they felt bad about it and wanted to help people get treatment." Oh, no. The Sacklers were caught dead to rights (again via E-Mail) viewing it as strictly a second profit center, so they could get people addicted, profit from that, then profit from them a second time when they decide to go to treatment and dry out.

    Google it, these E-Mails really are shocking. I would not have expected anyone outside a B-Grade movie supervillain to be as callous as these people.

    P.S. One of New York's objections to the bankruptcy filing is they caught the Sacklers, like some cheezy supervillan, siphoning $1 billion out of the company so they could claim "Whoops the company is broke, too bad" and keep the money themselves. Needless to say, they want that money put back in to pay off some of that settlement.

    • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday September 17 2019, @12:39PM (1 child)

      by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday September 17 2019, @12:39PM (#895111)

      And how is this any different than giving people colonoscopies known to cause colon cancer, telling people to wear sunscreen that blocks UVA but not UVB so you get skin cancer, etc?

      I'd like to see all these people go down. Too bad the BS in the healthcare industry is TBTF at this point.

      • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday September 17 2019, @12:42PM

        by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday September 17 2019, @12:42PM (#895112)

        And I also disagree with the idea the "patients" are pure victims here. Plenty of people have been beating the drums about corruption and incompetence in the healthcare industry for a long time, it is hard not to be exposed to it. Half the people harmed were probably rabid vaxxinators who got angry at anyone who questioned it.

  • (Score: 2) by DannyB on Tuesday September 17 2019, @02:59PM

    by DannyB (5839) Subscriber Badge on Tuesday September 17 2019, @02:59PM (#895163) Journal

    In 2007, after years of delays SCO finally was on the eve of "getting its day in court" on Monday Sept 17. On the eve of a trial that was obviously not going to go well for SCO, on Friday afternoon Sept 14, SCO declared bankruptcy.

    SCO is still in bankruptcy to this day. There are a number of interesting lessons about bankruptcy.

    First, bankruptcy court, at least in certain "corporate friendly" states, stinks to high heaven. The assets can be separated from the liabilities. The assets are sent in one direction, squeaky clean from BK court, under a new name. The liabilities are sent another direction, with no assets to actually recover even if after bankruptcy, a plaintiff can prove its case in court and win a judgement. There are simply no assets to recover from the "liability" company that is completely unrelated to the "assets" company after BK "reorganization".

    Second, the court system is designed to enrich the lawyers. A lawyer can get appointed as a "trustee" to oversee operations of the company. Fire everyone, including the CEO so that just a paper shell of a company remains. Then drag the case out for years and years. Billing the remaining bit of operating assets that the "liability" company had after "reorganization". Billing it until it is eventually bled dry.

    --
    With modern TVs you don't have to worry about braking the yolk on the back of the picture tube.
  • (Score: 2) by All Your Lawn Are Belong To Us on Tuesday September 17 2019, @04:37PM (1 child)

    by All Your Lawn Are Belong To Us (6553) on Tuesday September 17 2019, @04:37PM (#895246) Journal

    It is "OxyContin" and "Bankruptcy", not "OxyCotin" and "Bankrupty" - "OxyCotin" also appears in the summary.
    Sorry to be so abrupt about it.

    --
    This sig for rent.
(1)