News Corp. Pays Out For Voicemail Hacking Victims 99
New submitter SandmanWAIX sends this excerpt from ABC.net.au: "Rupert Murdoch's media empire has made huge payouts to 37 phone-hacking victims, including actor Jude Law, singer Danii Minogue, and former British deputy prime minister John Prescott, their lawyers said. ... The company has set up a multi-million-pound compensation scheme for victims of phone hacking in a bid to avoid further costly civil lawsuits. ... It has also made a payout of 2 million pounds to the family of murdered British schoolgirl Milly Dowler, while Mr. Murdoch made a personal donation of 1 million pounds to charities chosen by her family.'"
Jail time (Score:5, Insightful)
There is an equiry going on in the UK discussing this and other issues, but the answer is simple: people need to go to jail. Not only is there evidence of illegal activity (accing voicemails and emails), but now it looks like there is evidence of perjury (lying to the enquiry).
There is also evidence of obstruction (destruction of computers). It's quite clear that the illegal activity is at the highest levels of News Corp. People at the highest levels need to go to jail. Paying out this amount of money means nothing to billionaires.
A weak start (Score:4, Insightful)
The rest needs to be resolved by severe criminal penalties, jail time and the requirement that the Murdoch empire be broken up. News Corp should also lose all of its broadcast licenses world-wide.
Absolute joke (Score:5, Insightful)
This so-called compensation fund doesn't even figure as pocket change to News Corp. Murdoch is a multi billionnaire ($7.6bn at FYE 2011 according to Forbes). That's his /cash/ worth, not counting his liquable assets. If he gave a Dollar out of his own pocket to every man, woman and child on Earth he would STILL BE A BILLIONNAIRE.
This is in the same league as Microsoft "complying" with compensation orders from the courts in the US by issuing *vouchers for discounts on its own software*.
The consumer is still getting bent over and dryfucked, but legally.
Where Are We? (Score:5, Insightful)
I'd have a much higher opinion of my fellow vigilantes if instead of launching DDOS attacks against sites that the public never visit* they obtained incriminating evidence against their targets. They are supposed to be hackers, aren't they? Why aren't I hearing about leaked emails detailing how Murdoch himself knew about these crimes or how the *AA have been screwing over the people they claim to represent?
*Bringing down the RIAA site seems completely pointless when Joe Public would never see it anyway.
Re:A weak start (Score:2, Insightful)