Facebook asks for a moat of regulations it already meets

Re:Facebook asks for a moat of regulations it already meets by AnthonyMouse on Tuesday February 18, 2020 @02:02AM (#22354049)

That's easy to fix, just apply the rules only to companies having more than a hundred shareholders, and count shareholders of the parent for any subsidiary. Then you can't restructure Facebook to have less than a hundred shareholders because the number of shareholders is independent of the internal corporate structure.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Facebook asks for a moat of regulations it already meets by ascar on Tuesday February 18, 2020 @03:20AM (#22354359)

So any non-public company would be exempt?

There are multiple private multi billion dollar companies and I wouldn't be surprised, if they all have less than 100 shareholders.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Facebook asks for a moat of regulations it already meets by AnthonyMouse on Tuesday February 18, 2020 @02:14PM (#22359239)

> So any non-public company would be exempt?

All of the major tech companies are publicly traded.

Being publicly traded is also a major risk factor for hostile corporate behavior, because the top executives of private companies tend to be the owners and care more about the long-term than short-term profits, so it even makes sense as an explicit policy choice to regulate publicly traded companies more than private ones.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Facebook asks for a moat of regulations it already meets by anticensor on Tuesday February 18, 2020 @06:54AM (#22355275)

Non-public non-cooperative ones actually. Having thousands of members is very common in cooperatives.

[ Parent | on HN ]