Larry Lessig: Kluger Krugman. So defraud Californians of $9 billion, pay $1 million. But develop a new technology to make it easier for people to get access to music that they have presumptively purchased: pay more than $54 million.
Posted by: Ray Ritchey on September 3, 2003 02:02 PM
Article with details on the various settlements…
California criticizes FERC settlements
It says amounts are small part of what state is owed for illegal energy trading; the largest agreement so far is $857,089.
Posted by: A Halifax Lawyer on February 10, 2004 07:52 AM
I am new to the internet and I am surfing here and this is very interesting reading. I did a search in the search engines on “company blog” and I found your web blog.
I am a Lawyer in Halifax, Nova Scotia, Canada and thus my interest in searching for a company blog on the WWW.
I just wanted to see how the rest of the world thinks and see what trends and technology are happening in the world. I also was interested in a blog for myself which might possibly lead to a blob for my law firm, you never know, that is if I can understand the technology of operating a blog and from what you are discussing I am somewhat hesitant right now.
The different things discussed on a website found by searching for “company blog” in the search engine is very amusing reading to this Halifax Lawyer.
Respectfully yours
B. J. Stephens, LL.B.
A Halifax Lawyer
Posted by: Ran Talbott on September 3, 2003 08:31 AM
This is incredibly sloppy, Dan.
1. Only a third (15 of 43) of the companies involved
have actually settled with FERC (or, in some cases,
been exonerated).
2. According to a Reuters report published on the WBUR website
(do a google news search for “ferc california settlement”,
and you’ll probably find it in several places), two of
those 15 companies settled for over $800,000 each,
so the “$1 million” dollar figure is clearly bogus.
And at least one of those (Reliant) was cleared of
allegations it had been gaming the system: their
fine was for another form of hanky-panky.
3. FERC isn’t supposed to suck up all the ill-gotten gains
as fines: those are *criminal* penalties, and the recovery
of the money we were swindled out of is a completely
separate *civil* case.
And the discussion of mp3.com is even worse: they
didn’t invent any “new technology”. What they “invented”
was a new legal doctrine of “space shifting”, and
proceeded to build a business around it. Despite warnings
from lawyers that it wasn’t going to fly in court.
As we know, it didn’t. And, when the dust settled,
Robertson (whose hare-brained notion sank the company)
walked away about $250 million dollars richer, while
the people who bought and held stock at the IPO wound up
losing about 80% of their investment.
There may be an example of “stealing legally” here, but.
if there is, it’s not the energy companies (who haven’t
finished with the legal system yet).