News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:PG on nonprofits/Darfur by dfranke on Thursday January 22, 2009 @08:37PM (#445768)
And no bribe was offered? Undertaking a project in an area like that without being willing either to shoot or to bribe government officials strikes me as naive.
Re:PG on nonprofits/Darfur by h34t on Friday January 23, 2009 @12:21AM (#445989)
It's also illegal for a US, Canadian or European company to offer bribes to government officials abroad.

A recent crackdown cost Siemens $1.6 billion, as bribes were apart of their standard system of doing business. http://www.nytimes.com/2008/12/21/business/worldbusiness/21s...

Re:PG on nonprofits/Darfur by dfranke on Friday January 23, 2009 @02:46AM (#446133)
It occurs to me that it would be a fascinating test case if a charity like this one were to be tried for bribery and plead self-defense.
Re:PG on nonprofits/Darfur by anamax on Friday January 23, 2009 @12:48PM (#446713)
"plead self-defense" to whom? To the govt that you didn't grease correctly? To the govt in your home country that thinks that bribing other govts is wrong?

Note that "self-defense" typically is to prevent grave bodily harm or death and is usually reserved for immediate threats. Not being able to build houses for some poor wretch who will probably live at least a few weeks without the house doesn't qualify.

Re:PG on nonprofits/Darfur by dfranke on Friday January 23, 2009 @01:46PM (#446813)
To the home government. And while self-defense typically connotes imminent grave bodily harm, it is also typically plead only when one is accused of inflicting the same. In a country with rule of law, in non-imminent situations one is expected to seek the help of authorities rather than take matters into his own hands. But when that expectation is clearly unrealistic, then you have an interesting case.
Re:PG on nonprofits/Darfur by anamax on Sunday January 25, 2009 @06:02PM (#449671)
> In a country with rule of law, in non-imminent situations one is expected to seek the help of authorities rather than take matters into his own hands. But when that expectation is clearly unrealistic, then you have an interesting case.

No, you don't. The home govt has decided that bribery is wrong. It's well aware that banning bribery will mean that some poor wretch won't get a house and believes that that's an acceptable price to pay for the benefits of banning bribery.

Re:PG on nonprofits/Darfur by fub4r on Thursday January 22, 2009 @11:24PM (#445925)
Naive or principled? Who knows in this case. Sad reality is that in many parts of the world you've got to factor bribes into your financials.
Re:PG on nonprofits/Darfur by andreyf on Friday January 23, 2009 @12:06AM (#445973)
...in many parts of the world you've got to factor bribes into your financials...

In most parts, and not just to do business.