back to article HP pays to end kickback probe

HP is taking a two cents per share charge to end a Department of Justice investigation into bribery allegations. The company stressed that it was not admitting any wrongdoing, of course. The DOJ investigation began in 2007 and included Accenture and Sun. It centred on allegations that the three companies improperly charged …

COMMENTS

This topic is closed for new posts.
  1. Fluffykins Silver badge

    HP pays to end kickback probe. Is this

    Sort of kickback squared, perhaps?

  2. Tom7
    WTF?

    Er, hey, what?!?

    We're going to... er... "pay off" (bribe?) the prosecutors... to... stop investigating us for... er... bribery?

    1. Anonymous Coward
      Coat

      Re: Er, hey, what?!?

      Bugger, there goes this year's bonus as well ... (unless you're in management of course)

      Signed, overworked HPer.

  3. Kevin 43
    Grenade

    So its not bribery

    When you pay off the government?

    1. Fizzl

      Of course not!

      When the government gets it then it's either taxation or donations depending how rich you are.

  4. Greg J Preece

    I've always wondered how that works...

    Err, we might get convicted here...

    *Money*

    Wooo, innocent!

  5. Anonymous Coward
    Thumb Down

    And it's us plebs...

    ..that are forced to do annual 'ethics' training...

  6. adam payne

    This doesn't mean we're guilty

    When you pay to end an investigation and still try to claim innocence then you know someone's having a laugh.

    1. Old Man - Grey Fleece
      Stop

      Games Theory v Justice

      The cost of cooperating with the investigation and defending against a court case has to be set against the cost of settling early. It is not a question of guilty or innocent, it is a balance of costs and probabilities. If we are acquited (insert probability) what do we get, if found guilty (1 minus previous probability) what would the punative fine be? Now stack up against the cost of the payoff. Take least cost option.

      Of course the probabilities would be affected by what they know of the evidence available. that just affects the size of the swing between the choice of settling and going to court.

      IMHO the gap between the punishment if found guilty and the cost of settling out of court distorts any conclusions about guilt or innocence.

      Probably better to settle early as it keeps the money from going to the lawyers (on both sides).

  7. Anonymous Coward
    Big Brother

    It's OK, we have a training course for this.

    Will this be included as a practical example in next year's mandatory Ethics "Training" Course for the workers?

    I can't wait...

  8. tony trolle
    WTF?

    Wondering about HP

    IF it's part of that Intel kickback like Dell

  9. Anonymous Coward
    Grenade

    "part of that Intel kickback like Dell"

    Unlikely. Dell is basically a pure Intel shop and that's the way Intel and Dell want(ed) it to stay. HP has a long history of AMD product in desktops, laptops, and servers.

    "It is not a question of guilty or innocent,"

    Says who? The people with the money? Oh, that's all right then. I guess that makes "the war on drugs" a bit specious though, 'cos there's a lot of money there, but maybe they too are neither guilty nor innocent, so we could just call the whole silly thing off and get Tesco to do the sourcing and distribution, and collect the tax. Right?

  10. mhenriday
    Thumb Down

    Dura lex sed lex -

    unless, of course, one is a wealthy corporation (a juridical construction, which, according to the US Supreme Court, inherently possesses all the rights that the US Constitution gives real persons), in which case one pays a minor fine and admits no guilt. Ain't capitalism grand ?...

    Henri

This topic is closed for new posts.

Other stories you might like

Biting the hand that feeds IT © 1998–2022