News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:Uber concedes deception, prepares for $26M ACCC spanking by urthor on Wednesday April 27, 2022 @03:38AM (#31177347)
The Australian legal system has zero concept of punitive damages.

You can only have repertory (recuperative) damages.

There are no "monetary payments to deter future crime" in Australian civil law.

Digest that one for a second.

Re:Uber concedes deception, prepares for $26M ACCC spanking by chottocharaii on Wednesday April 27, 2022 @06:37AM (#31178322)
This is complete nonsense. You’re clearly not an Australian lawyer.

Deterrence is regularly a factor in civil infringement cases brought by regulators.

In other civil lawsuits, ordinarily damages are strictly ‘compensatory’. However, ‘exemplary’ damages also exist in some circumstances; and functionally identical to punitive damages.

https://legalvision.com.au/what-are-exemplary-damages/

Re:Uber concedes deception, prepares for $26M ACCC spanking by nl on Wednesday April 27, 2022 @04:39AM (#31177697)
This is misleading.

In Australia, criminal behaviour can incur fines[1]:

> Fines are monetary fines (criminal penalty) imposed by courts in criminal proceedings. Criminal standard of proof is required.

The ACCC has pretty significant ability to impose penalties:

> The maximum penalties per breach of the ACL [..] maximum penalties for breaches [..] will be the greater of: $10,000,000; or If Court can determine "reasonably attributable" benefit obtained, 3 times that value, or if Court cannot determine benefit, 10% of annual turnover in preceding 12 months.

[1] https://www.accc.gov.au/business/business-rights-protections...

Re:Uber concedes deception, prepares for $26M ACCC spanking by urthor on Wednesday April 27, 2022 @05:43AM (#31178065)
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Punitive_damages

Not all fines are punitive damages.

Re:Uber concedes deception, prepares for $26M ACCC spanking by chottocharaii on Wednesday April 27, 2022 @06:38AM (#31178332)
Exemplary damages is the Australian legal term of art for damages that are functionally identical to punitive damages.
Re:Uber concedes deception, prepares for $26M ACCC spanking by urthor on Wednesday April 27, 2022 @08:06AM (#31178873)
Well you have to dumb it down for the Americans.

The nature of the business though is that they're almost never awarded, except maybe for contempt of court?

Certainly not in a significant quantity against a corporation.

Re:Uber concedes deception, prepares for $26M ACCC spanking by nl on Wednesday April 27, 2022 @08:21PM (#31187429)
Commonwealth bank was recently fined $700m

https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.abc.net.au/article/9831064

Re:Uber concedes deception, prepares for $26M ACCC spanking by chottocharaii on Wednesday April 27, 2022 @08:28AM (#31179047)
it’s different terminology. no need to baselessly insult americans

They are awarded in a certain sets of circumstances. Contempt of court is far from the only example

substantial sums exemplary damages are certainly capable of being awarded against a corporation on the right set of facts

Re:Uber concedes deception, prepares for $26M ACCC spanking by chottocharaii on Wednesday April 27, 2022 @06:39AM (#31178343)
civil infringements can incorporate deterrence as a factor for damages awards also
Re:Uber concedes deception, prepares for $26M ACCC spanking by zensavona on Wednesday April 27, 2022 @03:47AM (#31177403)
Meanwhile nonviolent drug offenders landing in prison 5x'd between 2005-2013 in VIC, AU. Conveniently coinciding with the percentage of prisoners being held in private prisons increased substantially.
Re:Uber concedes deception, prepares for $26M ACCC spanking by nomilk on Wednesday April 27, 2022 @04:27AM (#31177644)
I hadn't realised Australia has private prisons. Seems to have at least 17 (wiki article hasn't been updated in a few years, so could be more): https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Private_prisons_in_Au...
Re:Uber concedes deception, prepares for $26M ACCC spanking by chottocharaii on Wednesday April 27, 2022 @06:41AM (#31178355)
The parent comment is incorrect
Re:Uber concedes deception, prepares for $26M ACCC spanking by throwawaylinux on Wednesday April 27, 2022 @03:49AM (#31177411)
> There are no "monetary payments to deter future crime" in Australian civil law.

I might be missing something but it seems like a good idea that a civil court is unable to punish people after deciding it is necessary to encourage them not to break a criminal law in future.

Australia does presumably have punitive fines and other punishments that are for deterrence in criminal punishments?

Re:Uber concedes deception, prepares for $26M ACCC spanking by vkou on Wednesday April 27, 2022 @04:31AM (#31177655)
> I might be missing something but it seems like a good idea that a civil court is unable to punish people after deciding it is necessary to encourage them not to break a criminal law in future.

If I can steal $5 from you, and the worst thing that happens if I get caught is that I have to give the $5 back, what sort of incentive do you think that creates?

Re:Uber concedes deception, prepares for $26M ACCC spanking by throwawaylinux on Wednesday April 27, 2022 @04:47AM (#31177746)
> If I can steal $5 from you, and the worst thing that happens if I get caught is that I have to give the $5 back, what sort of incentive do you think that creates?

Theft is a criminal matter, and there are punitive remedies for crimes.

Re:Uber concedes deception, prepares for $26M ACCC spanking by urthor on Wednesday April 27, 2022 @05:43AM (#31178063)
These are civil, white collar crimes.

It's the same concept. If a corporation commits a civil crime, the maximum in damages it can repay is the amount of damage it caused, give or take interest.

Re:Uber concedes deception, prepares for $26M ACCC spanking by throwawaylinux on Wednesday April 27, 2022 @06:36AM (#31178311)
> These are civil, white collar crimes.

> It's the same concept. If a corporation commits a civil crime, the maximum in damages it can repay is the amount of damage it caused, give or take interest.

It sounds like you're just making that up. I found the agency and the page on the regulation being breached:

https://www.accc.gov.au/business/business-rights-protections...

The maximum penalties per breach of the ACL including unconscionable conduct, making false or misleading representations, and supplying consumer goods or certain services that do not comply with safety standards or which are banned:

For corporations, will be the greater of:

    * $10,000,000*
    * 3 times the value of the benefit received, or
    * 10% of annual turnover in preceding 12 months, if court cannot determine benefit obtained from the offence.
The penalty for this particular "civil crime" (if that is actually what it's called), does not talk about repaying damages at all, and it can be 3 times the value of the benefit.

So what's the basis for what your seemingly contradictory claims?

Re:Uber concedes deception, prepares for $26M ACCC spanking by zaphirplane on Wednesday April 27, 2022 @07:41AM (#31178684)
Err you also win a criminal record, failing background checks and likely a custodial sentence
Re:Uber concedes deception, prepares for $26M ACCC spanking by vkou on Wednesday April 27, 2022 @11:27AM (#31181163)
None of these things can practically happen to a corporation. But maybe you're on to something, here - perhaps they should.
Re:Uber concedes deception, prepares for $26M ACCC spanking by throwawaylinux on Wednesday April 27, 2022 @07:00PM (#31186886)
> None of these things can practically happen to a corporation.

But the corporation didn't break a criminal law like the person in this example.

> But maybe you're on to something, here - perhaps they should.

Directors and executives can absolutely get convicted of crimes relating to their operation and oversight of the company. Whether the laws and investigating agencies have as much power as they should is very debatable but the legal framework is there.

Re:Uber concedes deception, prepares for $26M ACCC spanking by chottocharaii on Wednesday April 27, 2022 @06:39AM (#31178339)
The parent comment is completely incorrect as to their understanding of Australian law.
Re:Uber concedes deception, prepares for $26M ACCC spanking by drevil-v2 on Wednesday April 27, 2022 @06:09AM (#31178188)
That’s misleading. Australia has very strict and regularly enforced laws about “proceeds of crime” which acts as a deterrent against future crime.
Re:Uber concedes deception, prepares for $26M ACCC spanking by chottocharaii on Wednesday April 27, 2022 @06:40AM (#31178345)
Deterrence is a factor in civil infringement contexts also
Re:Uber concedes deception, prepares for $26M ACCC spanking by zaphirplane on Wednesday April 27, 2022 @07:38AM (#31178662)
Is it me ?

There have been a few posts in the last couple of days of people posting inaccurate information with complete confidence

Re:Uber concedes deception, prepares for $26M ACCC spanking by samhw on Wednesday April 27, 2022 @09:07AM (#31179364)
> in the last couple of days

I have some bad news for you

Re:Uber concedes deception, prepares for $26M ACCC spanking by 2rsf on Wednesday April 27, 2022 @04:19AM (#31177599)
The same in Sweden, no punitive damages
Re:Uber concedes deception, prepares for $26M ACCC spanking by chottocharaii on Wednesday April 27, 2022 @06:40AM (#31178352)
It probably exists under a different name; however i’m not confident on the state of swedish civil law.
Re:Uber concedes deception, prepares for $26M ACCC spanking by actionfromafar on Wednesday April 27, 2022 @05:42AM (#31178061)
True but there are fines which can sometimes be substantial especially for companies.
Re:Uber concedes deception, prepares for $26M ACCC spanking by urthor on Wednesday April 27, 2022 @05:45AM (#31178070)
Repertory fines are rarely enough to deter corporations.

They'll simply do the cost/benefit equation on breaking the law.

Only criminal charges against corporate officers and punitive damages promotes change.

Re:Uber concedes deception, prepares for $26M ACCC spanking by moonchrome on Wednesday April 27, 2022 @06:43AM (#31178372)
>Only criminal charges against corporate officers and punitive damages promotes change.

That's a factual statement without any evidence supporting it. There's plenty of punitive damages against drug abuse and do you see any signs of it working ?

Re:Uber concedes deception, prepares for $26M ACCC spanking by urthor on Wednesday April 27, 2022 @07:45AM (#31178718)
Corporations who have board meetings and shareholders have a very, very different response to criminal charges.

Compared to individuals addicted to illegal substances.

Re:Uber concedes deception, prepares for $26M ACCC spanking by moonchrome on Wednesday April 27, 2022 @10:45AM (#31180524)
And you're trying to prevent illegal activity that is discussed in board meetings and communicated to shareholders ?
Re:Uber concedes deception, prepares for $26M ACCC spanking by andrepd on Wednesday April 27, 2022 @06:26AM (#31178265)
>criminal charges against corporate officers

Absolutely. The discussion is centered on fines to companies but the other side is personal punishment of the actual physical people who made the decision to break the law.