News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:Guiding a Venture-Backed Startup to a Felony by sigacts on Saturday August 20, 2016 @01:58PM (#12327628)
I agree with your assessment. What is intetesting is that this group structured the deal like a venture-backed company. The LLC documents looked like many other versions I have seen. The Scoundrel folks thought that this formation scheme gave them immunity from accountability.
Re:Guiding a Venture-Backed Startup to a Felony by will_brown on Saturday August 20, 2016 @02:07PM (#12327665)
I see it quite regularly where laymen create an LLC, find themselves personally liable for company actions/debts and then can not wrap their mind around how they could be liable for an entity that is literally called a limited liability company.

It actually reminds me of the people who take the opinion that in the magical world of the DAO no one can be liable for anything because by definition if an action occurred, then it is legal because it was contractually agreed to.

It's an important lesson to learn that corporate veils can be pierced and contracts can be voided (i.e. unfair; deceptive; fraud in the inducment; illegal; etc...).

Re:Guiding a Venture-Backed Startup to a Felony by tamana on Saturday August 20, 2016 @05:07PM (#12328314)
The word "limited liability" refers to the fact that the owners are liability only for an amount up to their investment, within the scope of the corporation. The limit refers to the investment, not the fact that criminal activity is still legal exposure. Obviously an owner cannot sign away liability for individual criminal activity, same as with any corporation.
Re:Guiding a Venture-Backed Startup to a Felony by will_brown on Saturday August 20, 2016 @07:57PM (#12328846)
And while you have stated the rule, what people don't understand is the exceptions in which members/owners of LLCs can in fact be personally liable above and beyond their investment in the entity.