News for hackers. Stuff that matters.

A comment on The Worst Ideas of the Decade - Sarbanes-Oxley. Parent comment

Re:The Worst Ideas of the Decade - Sarbanes-Oxley by cwan on Monday December 21, 2009 @05:24PM (#1008732)
I'm sure one of the many lawyers who lurk can elaborate but I'm pretty sure that limited liability doesn't shield managers who commit criminal acts.
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:The Worst Ideas of the Decade - Sarbanes-Oxley by cabalamat on Monday December 21, 2009 @06:07PM (#1008823)
It doesn't. It does shield shareholders. Sharesholders control what a company does, by choosing its directors, so if they are made responsible for a company's misdeeds, they'll have an incentive to police it.
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:The Worst Ideas of the Decade - Sarbanes-Oxley by elai on Monday December 21, 2009 @09:18PM (#1009227)
So if I buy a few stocks in microsoft as a %0.00001 stock holder and microsoft get's another anti-trust charge I should be held liable too?
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:The Worst Ideas of the Decade - Sarbanes-Oxley by cabalamat on Tuesday December 22, 2009 @02:44PM (#1010592)
Obviously if you only hold a piffling number of shares, you have little control over the company. So it'd make sens to restrict this to major and/or controlling shareholders.
[ Parent | on HN ]