Reply to post:

Uber hid database hack from FTC while FTC probed Uber for an earlier database hack

Anonymous Coward
Anonymous Coward

I suspect the "no admission of guilt" is a practical approach for the US, since it enables the regulator to settle without encouraging the guilty party to contest the decision in court, and also it avoids the charge that the regulator is setting itself up as judge, jury and executioner. I agree that it seems inherently unsatisfactory, but at a practical level it is perhaps the only way of getting regulatory settlements done without decades of court "action", that might also result in perverse outcomes on narrow legal points.

To illustrate this, the Enron bankruptcy in 2001 had serious legal action that continued for at least fifteen years through US courts, resulting in all manner of unworthy corporations getting big payouts, as well as some deserving cases (mostly banks) taking multi-billiion dollar hits. Would you want Uber to be handed to the US courts, with final settlement maybe the other side of 2030?

POST COMMENT House rules

Not a member of The Register? Create a new account here.

  • Enter your comment

  • Add an icon

Anonymous cowards cannot choose their icon

Biting the hand that feeds IT © 1998–2021