HP Pays $14.5M to Make Civil Charges Disappear

theodp writes "The California Attorney General's Office negotiated a $14.5 million payoff from HP as part of a settlement that calls for the state not to pursue civil charges related to the now infamous spy scandal against the company and its current or former officers or directors (felony criminal charges against five individuals still remain). HP also agreed to maintain the watchdog positions of chief ethics officer and chief privacy officer for five years."

Re:A more fashionable solution!

[Anonymous Coward]

Nowadays, when breaking the law, a company-supplied penalty is paid and case closed.

"Normal" people go to jail.....

Sigh, could you not even bother to read the summary properly? What part of "felony criminal charges against five individuals still remain" do you find difficult to grasp?

Re:A more fashionable solution!

[Christianson]

Nowadays, when breaking the law, a company-supplied penalty is paid and case closed.

"Normal" people go to jail.....

People still might. The AG isn't waiving rights to press criminal charges against indiviuals, and in fact is pressing ahead with at least five cases, including against Dunn.

This actually doesn't seem like a terrible thing to me. A civil case against HP would be an enormous burden on the state of California, drag on for years, and by the virtue of the sheer size of HP, be unlikely to result in anything more than a wrist-slap. This settlement gets HP to admit to wrongdoing, puts some measures in place (pathetic though they may be) to try and keep them from doing it again, and not only saves the state money, but gives them a warchest to go after the real villains in this case: the executives who felt that the shield of incorporation gave them the right to condone and engage in unethical behaviour.

HP is in the clear though

[Anonymous Coward]

and that is the point.

Re:Buying injustice...

[Otter]

...but I really think this is an injustice for the people who had their identities and privacy compromised...

AFAICT, they can certainly still bring civil action, shareholders already are suing, the SEC is investigating and criminal charges are still on the table. Basically, HP paid a fine to avoid the risk of a larger fine, as is completely routine.

I'd wonder where "theodp" and CowboyNeal are getting their bizarre spin on this from if I didn't know that most of the people here still don't understand the difference between criminal and civil law, despite spending every day ranting about legal proceedings.

Re:So the shareholders pay?

[Anonymous Coward]

Thats ridiculous - the shareholders must pay for the directors' irresponsilibity?

Uh, yeah. It's called "ownership". You own (part of) the company, you take (part of) the risks. Those risks include the possibility that your asshat employees (including your board) will screw you.

And since when was it possible to settle criminal cases! ridiculous

Jesus, not only didn't you RTFA, you didn't even read the /. post. It was the civil case that was settled. Criminal charges are still in play.

Re:Bah and bah again.

[east coast]

How on earth can anyone actually feel free in a country where citizens are put behind bars for minor fraud, while businesses like HP (which are actually run by REAL people!!) can pay-off a judge while calling it 'being sanctioned'?

It's called a CIVIL case. If you're not familiar with the American legal system you probably don't know how far off base you are. You can not be "put behind bars" in a civil case. This is a case to determine liability in terms of monetary damages. The criminal case will still happen and that's where people get jailed.

Either you don't know what you're talking about or you're just a troll.

Re:Mod Parent UP

[Anonymous Coward]

Allow me to expand the concept here:

The Attorney General in question here is Bill Lockyer, who in 2004 was found to be shopping around draft legislation provided to him by the MPAA:
http://www.wired.com/news/culture/digiwood/0,62665 -0.html [wired.com] ... the same MPAA whose seven members were contributors to Bill Lockyer's 2006 campaign ...
http://www.slumdance.com/blogs/brian_flemming/arch ives/000809.html [slumdance.com] .. and, yes, that's the same MPAA that killed the anti-pretexting bill:
http://www.wired.com/news/technology/0,72214-0.htm l [wired.com]

So the California A.G. has just taken statuatory damages levied against H.P. for infringing upon the rights of the individual ... and instead of using them to, I don't know, help protect the rights CA citizens - he has reserved them for use in anti-piracy litigation.

Heck of a job, Lockyer.