• givesomefucks@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      19 days ago

      It’s the same thing Brazil did.

      He’s rich enough that he’s kind of a parent corporation by himself, so:

      X was previously accused of violating the Digital Services Act (DSA), which could result in fines of up to 6 percent of total worldwide annual turnover. That fine would be levied on the “provider” of X, which could be defined to include other Musk-led firms.

      But yeah, American law has been limited so the buck stops at the company which declares bankruptcy and the money starts a new company.

      Not everyone else system is as shitty

  • reksas@sopuli.xyz
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    19 days ago

    fine the fucker for 20% of his net “worth”, that should give him some pause

    • DancingBear@midwest.social
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      17 days ago

      Not really billions is beyond being halved

      (Was drinking when I wrote this, was saying billions is a so much money it’s difficult to conceptualize, seems like folks understood for the most part, but someone said musks money is in stocks etc which is a factor, anyways be well)

  • Skvlp@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    edit-2
    19 days ago

    It’s easy to support when Elon is the recipient, but is this a good precedent to set?

    • GrundlButter@lemmy.dbzer0.com
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      19 days ago

      Unironically, yes. You shouldn’t be able to shield your actions under a different corporate umbrella.

      “Oh, guess we can’t fine them much because Twitter is a money pit, so they’ll get to continue breaking the law for cheap”

      Nah, make the fine off of his entire net worth, make him cash in some of that stock so he can finally pay taxes and fines. Make it hurt enough for him to consider not breaking the laws of countries he wants to do business in.

      • tekato@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        18 days ago

        Sounds good in principle, but isn’t the one of the main purposes of creating an LLC or Corporation to shield your personal assets from the company’s finances? Everyone cheers for these policies until you’re the one they’re coming for. I hope you’re as cheerful when the government wipes your personal bank account as consequence of your company’s affairs.

        • Honytawk@lemmy.zip
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          18 days ago

          LLCs shouldn’t exist in the first place.

          A companys owner should always be liable for the laws its company breaks.

    • RubberDuck@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      18 days ago

      Shipping companies setup separate LLC’s for their ships so of they have an accident the ship goes bankrupt and they keep their profits shielded… that kind of stuff is bullshit

      • tekato@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        18 days ago

        Yes. Like every system, there are those who abuse it. But you must be careful so that while trying to punish those abusers, you don’t end up creating avenues to also punish those who don’t abuse the system, but simply make a mistake. This sets a precedent so that the government can target the assets of the owner of the company if they’re not satisfied the company punishment, which doesn’t sound as cool when the company in question is your family’s bakery or your neighbor’s paralegal office.

  • ChaoticNeutralCzech@feddit.org
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    18 days ago

    Do it. The crimes are almost entirely by him personally, and had unprecedented damage. He should be responsible with all his money - a Twitter-sized blow would be a slap on the wrist as the platform is worth just $5B or thereabouts.

  • Thebeardedsinglemalt@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    18 days ago

    How about making them such a high percentage that it would genuinely impact their bottom line and not a measly amount calculated as “cost of doing business”