[HN Gopher] German court sends VW execs to prison over Dieselgat...
       ___________________________________________________________________
        
       German court sends VW execs to prison over Dieselgate scandal
        
       Author : Tomte
       Score  : 609 points
       Date   : 2025-05-26 14:59 UTC (8 hours ago)
        
 (HTM) web link (www.politico.eu)
 (TXT) w3m dump (www.politico.eu)
        
       | FirmwareBurner wrote:
       | I see this as an absolute win. Personal liability is the way to
       | keep corporations accountable.
       | 
       | As long as breaking the law only results with a fine the company
       | has to pay, then the issue is an accounting problem for the
       | executives, but the moment they risk going to jail, then it
       | becomes a legal problem for them so they actually address it.
        
       | hermitcrab wrote:
       | Good for Germany, but it is all too rare to see bad corporate
       | behaviour punished like this. Steal PS10k from a company, and you
       | will probably go to prison for a long time. Start a company and
       | steal billions from your customers and/or the tax payer, and you
       | will probably get away with it. I believe Iceland was the only
       | country to jail bankers after the 2008 banking disaster. We are
       | still waiting for the British government to bring any individuals
       | to account for wide scale corruption and profiteering during
       | COVID.
        
         | FirmwareBurner wrote:
         | Because with large companies, blame and accountability gets
         | spread thin over a wide area till it evaporates, so everyone
         | gets away with it.
        
           | fanwood wrote:
           | Not really, it's just that rich people are mostly above the
           | law most of the time
        
             | FirmwareBurner wrote:
             | Rich people are above the law precisely because they use
             | corporations and corporate laws as shields to deflect
             | personal liability of their actions as a actions of "the
             | company" which is a faceless entity.
             | 
             |  _" You see, I didn't steal your money, the company I ran
             | stole your money, but that's actually on you because you
             | didn't read the fine print I put in the contract you
             | signed. And don't worry, justice was served, the company
             | got punished and is now insolvent. Now watch this drive
             | *swings golf club*"_
        
               | wat10000 wrote:
               | It's worse than that. Rich-people crimes are often
               | codified as much less severe than regular-people crimes,
               | or are just outright legal.
               | 
               | This is a great example. Why is this emissions fakery
               | illegal? Ultimately it's because pollution kills people.
               | Are these people going to prison for killing people? Not
               | exactly. They're going to prison for killing _too many_
               | people. If they had stayed within the limits, they'd
               | still be killing people, just not as many, and it would
               | be 100% legal.
               | 
               | Stab a person in the lungs, go to jail. Kill people by
               | putting toxins into their lungs, well, just stay under
               | this limit.
               | 
               | Walk out the door with a $10 item you didn't pay for,
               | crime. Fail to pay your worker $1,000 that they earned,
               | that's a civil matter. Worst case you'll have to pay a
               | penalty.
        
               | lkbm wrote:
               | > Why is this emissions fakery illegal? Ultimately it's
               | because pollution kills people. Are these people going to
               | prison for killing people? Not exactly. They're going to
               | prison for killing too many people. If they had stayed
               | within the limits, they'd still be killing people, just
               | not as many, and it would be 100% legal.
               | 
               | Polluting is not a "rich person" crime. It's very much
               | something normal/poor people do a lot, too. It's common
               | for individuals to burn leaves. It's less common, but
               | also an active problem, for them to burn piles of trash
               | (including plastic, tires, etc.)
               | 
               | As an individual, I'm allowed to do a certain amount of
               | pollution (some because it's legal, some because it's
               | unenforced), and will get fined if I do too much, same as
               | the corporation.
        
               | wat10000 wrote:
               | As an individual, at least you can make the argument that
               | your activities result in far less than one death. What's
               | the appropriate punishment for one micromort? I don't
               | know the answer to that but it's probably not too much.
               | 
               | Large polluters don't have that excuse. I recall that
               | diesel hate alone resulted in dozens or hundreds of
               | excess deaths. How many people do compliant cars kill?
               | How many does a coal power plant kill? And all 100%
               | legal.
        
               | lb1lf wrote:
               | "Corporations have neither bodies to be punished, nor
               | souls to be condemned, they therefore do as they like."
               | 
               | Edward, Lord Thurlow c.1850
        
               | lurk2 wrote:
               | > I didn't steal your money, the company I ran stole your
               | money
               | 
               | This isn't how it works.
        
               | const_cast wrote:
               | This is exactly how it works. Liability spread out over
               | even just 10 people is _so_ much less risky than one
               | person.
               | 
               | A corporation can do pretty much anything. Steal, lie,
               | poison communities, give people HIV. Anything.
        
             | anovikov wrote:
             | When it comes to criminal offences, they are pretty much
             | within the law, well except they can afford better lawyers
             | so usually get away with minimum legally possible
             | punishment.
             | 
             | Companies and the concept of limited liability exists to
             | make innovation possible. No one will start a startup
             | knowing they will have their house confiscated and go to
             | prison if it fails. And, because majority of money
             | businessmen make is the stock worth, company being
             | insolvent and thus it's stock losing all value is in itself
             | a punishment heavy enough for the founders.
        
               | nemonemo wrote:
               | We need to balance the benefit and the downside of the
               | limited liability in corporations. If innovation no
               | longer becomes beneficial for the society and only
               | beneficial for a small number of people, perhaps the
               | society may need to reconsider the concept.
        
               | lucianbr wrote:
               | > No one will start a startup knowing they will have
               | their house confiscated and go to prison if it fails.
               | 
               | What does that have to do with anything? We're not
               | discussing a case of VW making bad business decisions and
               | losing money.
               | 
               | If you start a company and break the law and harm people,
               | you should have your house confiscated and/or go to
               | prison. If you can't take this responsibility, just don't
               | start the startup, that's perfect.
               | 
               | You are creating confusion about the subject being
               | discussed in order to defend criminals.
        
               | SoftTalker wrote:
               | Yes that was a bad example. The "limited liability"
               | concept applies to financial losses, not crimes.
        
               | thatguy0900 wrote:
               | Why would you go to jail unless you're doing something
               | illegal? Are you honestly saying startups should be
               | legally exempt from pollution laws and allowed to cheat
               | brazenly on commissions tests by public agencies? It's
               | fair for rich people to just lose some income(and still
               | be rich) for crimes while poor people have to go to jail
               | is honestly a unhinged take
        
           | constantcrying wrote:
           | In this case both the company and the responsible managers
           | were held liable. Of course a lot of blame shifting was
           | attempted, but clearly it did not result in no one being held
           | responsible.
        
           | aeyes wrote:
           | Ultimately the CEO is responsible. To me it doesn't even
           | matter if the CEO knows about it or not, if not the company
           | has poor governance which is the CEOs full responsibility.
           | 
           | Wirecard CEO has been arrested since 2020, will probably sit
           | for another 10 years.
        
             | AnimalMuppet wrote:
             | I believe "knew or should have known" is the legal
             | statement. Ignorance (either deliberate or accidental)
             | doesn't get you off the hook.
        
               | nthingtohide wrote:
               | Rhodesia solution is magnificient in this case.
               | 
               | Sending A Letter To The PM | Yes Minister | BBC Comedy
               | Greats
               | 
               | https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bE6lpKkcFQY
        
               | brookst wrote:
               | But negligence is fundamentally different from mens rea.
               | Fine to punish both but I am not a fan of justice
               | intentionally ignoring context.
        
               | dragonwriter wrote:
               | > But negligence is fundamentally different from mens rea
               | 
               | It differs in that _mens rea_ is the legal concept of a
               | culpable state of mind, and negligence is one example.
               | More fully, a crime is generally defined by a prohibited
               | act (actua reus) and a wrongful state of mind (mens rea),
               | though there are strict liability crimes with no mens rea
               | required.
               | 
               | For, say, murder (in common law, specific statutory
               | schemes may diverge from this somewhat), the actus reus
               | is homicide, and the mens rea is "malice aforethought".
               | 
               | While "malice aforethought" is _sui generis_ and seen
               | only in murder, the common kinds of _mens rea_ used in
               | defining crimes, in descending order of the severity with
               | which they are usually treated, are intent, recklessness,
               | and negligence. (The same mental states are relevant in
               | tort liability, though strict liability in tort is more
               | common, and the civil and criminal definitions of
               | negligence, particularly, are somewhat different.)
        
             | autobodie wrote:
             | That is extremely wreckless. The board is unquestionably
             | the most responsible party.
        
             | DocTomoe wrote:
             | Wirecard CEO was proven beyond reasonable doubt that he
             | personally was involved in large-scale fraud.
        
             | bluGill wrote:
             | The question is should the CEO have know. A CEO that trys
             | to set a culture of doing the right thing, with training on
             | what the right thing is, and other such things can still be
             | deceived by someone low level who cheats. It is possible
             | for one person to cover their tracks for a long time if
             | they are trying to cheat. It can be years to track down who
             | is doing the immoral thing even after you catch something
             | is wrong.
             | 
             | The question this is this one person (or small group)
             | operating against their instructions, or is it the CEO
             | encouraging people to cheat? That can be a hard question,
             | but we want CEOs to think if I do "enough" (whatever that
             | is) to ensure we obey the law I'm okay and thus I want to
             | ensure enough is done. There are always crooks in the
             | world, we want to ensure they are not encourged. If the CEO
             | is always at fault their thought is likely to go to how can
             | I ensure that tracks are covered so they nobody can be
             | convicted.
        
               | jajko wrote:
               | Those golden parachutes and lavish lifestyle comes with a
               | cost. That cost is responsibility and risks it brings.
               | 
               | Whether he knew or nit is a matter for courst, but in any
               | case he is responsible too. Punish crooks harsh and
               | visibly, reward honesty and good engineering massively
               | and also visibly and company as a whole will act
               | accordingly. We dont talk about a single guy hacking some
               | firmware build, but a well known company culture.
        
             | rurban wrote:
             | Which CEO? Of the 4 big German manufacturers, which
             | conspired do implement these special cheats, or Bosch which
             | implemented this cheat, and supported it as such?
             | 
             | Or the politicians who wrote into law to able to use such a
             | cheating device?
             | 
             | That would be 5 CEO's plus at least 2 german politicians,
             | plus 20 more politicians in all other countries which
             | selected this cheating EU standard.
        
               | rightbyte wrote:
               | Wanting to use velocity profiles to set exhaust treatment
               | parameters during warm up of the engine is totally
               | reasonable.
               | 
               | Bosh's software is tunable to silly extents to avoid
               | expensive vehicle testing as testing is tied to binaries
               | due to bad processes.
               | 
               | You can more or less make a different program by changing
               | 'parameters'.
               | 
               | I really think it might be unfortunate if this would
               | extend into a crusade versus general computing.
        
           | _DeadFred_ wrote:
           | Someone floated on here that the punishment should be partial
           | government ownership stakes instead of weak fines. It doesn't
           | syphon off funds and risk damaging important national
           | companies that are 'too big to punish'. Instead it dilutes
           | shareholder value and DIRECTLY impacts the company owners. It
           | also gives the government an inside place in the company
           | which no company wants to deal with. If a company doesn't
           | change ultimately the owners lose ownership.
        
             | lucianbr wrote:
             | Proof that solutions exist, if we want them. Whatever the
             | cause of the apparent impunity of large corporations and
             | rich people, it is not a lack of workable solutions. See
             | also fines proportional to income, which now exist in
             | multiple countries.
        
             | 7952 wrote:
             | I wonder if you could require the company to licence all
             | its IP for free within the country. So that the brand and
             | designs could still exist.
        
             | DocTomoe wrote:
             | VW already is owned by the German state of NRW (20% of the
             | voting rights, 11.8% of the equity)
        
               | junga wrote:
               | Not exactly. Volkswagen headquarters are located in
               | Wolfsburg which belongs to the German state of Lower
               | Saxony (Niedersachsen). NRW, or officially abbreviated
               | NW, is the state of North Rhine-Westphalia (Nordrhein-
               | Westfalen).
               | 
               | Therefore it's Lower Saxony that owns some parts of
               | Volkswagen.
        
             | Nasrudith wrote:
             | That sounds like a terrible idea because it would
             | progressively "bribe" the government to be in their
             | interest to take the company's side as they gain more and
             | more of it. Combine it that conflicts of interest with the
             | appearance of improprirety and another conflict of interest
             | of making expropriation of the successful a temptation.
             | 
             | The latter could be even more disasterous long term. Nobody
             | wants to go out to dinner with cannibals or show up at the
             | stores for fear of being eaten. Likewise being known as an
             | expropriating country, you may as well go ahead and embargo
             | yourself.
        
           | potato3732842 wrote:
           | Not just companies, nonprofits, religions, governments
        
         | constantcrying wrote:
         | >Start a company and steal billions from your customers and/or
         | the tax payer, and you will probably get away with it.
         | 
         | In this case not only were the managers personally held liable,
         | the company itself also had to pay vast amounts of compensation
         | to customers. Not only in Germany or the EU, but also to US
         | customers.
        
           | hulitu wrote:
           | > not only were the managers personally held liable
           | 
           | Yes but not all of them. The top one is still evading
           | justice.
        
             | DocTomoe wrote:
             | Good luck proving where the decision was made. Volkswagen's
             | CEO is unlikely to have been asked whether to be 'creative'
             | about testing setups.
        
             | Aeolun wrote:
             | He's not evading justice if he was never involved. That's
             | the whole point of having a 4 year trial, so you can figure
             | out who was actually guilty.
        
         | arthurcolle wrote:
         | They jailed 1 banker lol
        
           | MrDresden wrote:
           | > _They jailed 1 banker lol_
           | 
           | You've been incorrectly informed.
           | 
           | As reported back in 2018[0], 36 individuals had already
           | received a cumulative jail sentence of 96 years, with still
           | more cases ongoing when this report was written.
           | 
           | [0]: https://www.visir.is/g/20181632401d/36-manns-i-
           | samtals-96-ar...
        
             | arthurcolle wrote:
             | Thanks for the correction. I incorrectly recalled from that
             | documentary "Inside Job"
        
         | izacus wrote:
         | The question is, whether VW as a German company is now going to
         | end up being beaten by US competitors which could do even more
         | nasty stuff unpunished.
        
           | LunaSea wrote:
           | Germany is free to prove that these companies are cheating as
           | well.
        
           | thatguy0900 wrote:
           | We should let our executives commit crimes lest they be
           | outcompeted by other executives committing worse crimes is a
           | terrible argument. It's more a argument for not letting the
           | other company compete as easily in your country
        
             | dguest wrote:
             | Not to mention that it assumes assumes lying, cheating, and
             | corruption is just the price you pay for quality products.
             | 
             | Seriously, if people are framing this in terms of "what's
             | good for industry" vs "what is the right thing to do", the
             | crooks have already won and your national industry has
             | already lost.
        
             | izacus wrote:
             | If our companies get destroyed, people fired and US/Chinese
             | crooks win while EU spirals into recession, moral high
             | ground is going to be a poor comfort.
        
           | lucianbr wrote:
           | It has been some years since VW had to give up cheating on
           | emission tests. Were they beaten by US competitors during
           | this time? I have not read any news about it.
        
             | FridayoLeary wrote:
             | They have kind of abandoned diesel engines, which the whole
             | scandal was based around. It became clear that it would be
             | impossible to create diesel engines which would comply with
             | enviromental standards, which is a shame since they are
             | more efficient and it is consumers who are losing out. They
             | are still one of the main automotive conglomerations today.
             | If anything American car companies are losing the market in
             | Europe, Ford for example have abandoned their best selling
             | model - the Focus, and in the UK at least they are the only
             | US brand besides for Tesla.
        
               | lucianbr wrote:
               | I could be wrong but I think BMW and Mercedes still make
               | diesel engines. So maybe it's only impossible at a lower
               | price point? Although the difference isn't that large.
        
               | FridayoLeary wrote:
               | Even VW never stopped selling diesel cars, but they are
               | certainly being phased out everywhere and it's not as
               | popular as it once was.
        
               | lhoff wrote:
               | VW still builds and sells Diesel engines in its Cars. For
               | Volkswagen and Skoda the share of diesel cars was about
               | 30% in Germany. Source (only in German and behind
               | paywall, sorry) https://de.statista.com/statistik/daten/s
               | tudie/468422/umfrag...
        
               | Symbiote wrote:
               | Using [1], BMW have 87 models, of which 13 can be
               | electric, 13 plug-in hybrid, 47 petrol and just 6 diesel.
               | The six are all SUVs.
               | 
               | Mercedes don't have an easy filter, but they do have some
               | cars available with diesel engines, e.g. C-Class.
               | 
               | Diesel is now down to 9.5% of new cars sold in Europe (Q1
               | 2025), less than full EVs ([2]).
               | 
               | [1] https://www.bmw.co.uk/en/all-models.html
               | 
               | [2] https://www.acea.auto/pc-registrations/new-car-
               | registrations...
        
               | lucianbr wrote:
               | There are several 3 series diesel variants sold right now
               | in my country, so maybe we need a bit more data gathering
               | before drawing conclusions.
               | 
               | It does seem like diesel is trending lower, but it's not
               | gone yet, regardless whether you think that is a good
               | thing or not.
               | 
               | In any case, my point was this:
               | 
               | > it would be impossible to create diesel engines which
               | would comply with enviromental standards
               | 
               | is false. Which it is.
               | 
               | Or multiple car manufacturers are still cheating, I guess
               | we must consider the possibility.
        
               | SoftTalker wrote:
               | They do make them, but they don't sell them in the USA
               | any more. Nobody does.
        
               | tonyedgecombe wrote:
               | The funny thing is their emissions weren't that bad,
               | several other European manufacturers were worse.
        
               | DocTomoe wrote:
               | In all fairness, in the general European perception, with
               | the Cougar, the Puma, and the Focus, Ford is not really
               | seen as an "American" brand. Especially the Focus has
               | virtually nothing to do with what Europeans would
               | consider 'an American car'. It is the quintessential low-
               | to-mid-tier Eurocar: small, cheap, does what it is
               | supposed to do.
               | 
               | Compare that to e.g. Chevrolet, which tried - and failed
               | - to get a foothold in Europe. The failure was mostly
               | them not understanding the local market.
        
               | darkwater wrote:
               | Didn't Chevrolet just bought and rebranded some Korean
               | automaker?
        
               | pqtyw wrote:
               | AFAIK they were selling rebadged Daewoo models which were
               | built on platforms developed by Opel. I suppose they
               | wanted a budget brand and manufacturing and importing
               | from Korea was cheaper back in those days than just using
               | Opel's factories..
        
               | pqtyw wrote:
               | > e.g. Chevrolet
               | 
               | Also it overlapped a lot with Opel which a much more
               | successful brand in Europe. Basically it was an off-
               | brand/cheap Opel, which wasn't exactly doing that great
               | itself...
        
               | SoftTalker wrote:
               | Ford sold the Focus in the USA also, I had one and loved
               | it. It was one of their few "world" cars.
        
               | amanaplanacanal wrote:
               | Consumers still have to breathe though. I'd be totally
               | fine if diesel engines were completely phased out. In the
               | US we somehow can't even get rid of those idiots that
               | retune their engines for "rolling coal".
        
               | AshleyGrant wrote:
               | Because, for the most part, we aren't doing damned thing
               | about it. "Rolling coal" is inherently a very public act
               | of law breaking, but I doubt a single person has ever
               | been pulled over by any American cop for it. The EPA and
               | certain states were trying through other enforcement
               | mechanisms to fight it, but with Trump in office, it's
               | basically encouraged to "delete" your Diesel emissions
               | equipment if you aren't in commercial operation.
        
               | linksnapzz wrote:
               | ...said deletion, which returns your truck to the state
               | of the regulatory art circa 2009, also results in a
               | doubling of fuel economy and about an 80% jump in
               | horsepower.
        
               | Interesco wrote:
               | These percentages seem a bit high compared to what I have
               | seen. I usually see/hear about a 1-3mpg and 10-30% HP. I
               | understand the point you are trying to make but "doubling
               | of fuel economy and about an 80% jump in horsepower" is
               | far from accurate, especially considering the downsides
               | of a delete on every outside of the vehicle
        
               | paganel wrote:
               | You can't wage modern war without diesel engines, those
               | trucks won't drive themselves close to the front-lines
               | (and, no, electric-powered trucks in times of war are a
               | terrible idea, and the ones powered by gasoline are a lot
               | less efficient and don't provide the same torque
               | numbers).
        
               | joker99 wrote:
               | Valid points you're making. Let me make a counter point:
               | as a German, I've seen tanks on 5/6 occasions in my life,
               | never using their own engines. But at the same time, I've
               | seen hundreds of cars every day and breathed their
               | emissions. It's totally fine if tanks continue using
               | diesel, but cars, trucks etc. not using diesel (or gas)
               | engines anymore will have a measurable effect on my
               | health
        
               | lukan wrote:
               | I actually would also prefer modern stealth tanks battery
               | or hydrogen/fuel cell powered.
               | 
               | Otherwise good point.
        
               | paganel wrote:
               | But then you'd also lose the capability of making diesel
               | engines for good, and, again, they're not used only for
               | tanks when it comes to warfare.
               | 
               | Just look at the hole the US has dug for itself when it
               | stopped producing civilian sea-ships, nowadays the cost
               | of producing or even repairing its war-oriented sea-ships
               | is way too high. And not only that, but it doesn't have
               | the people with the knowhow to build those ships anymore,
               | no matter the money thrown at the problem.
        
               | Gud wrote:
               | Why would electric trucks be a terrible idea in war time?
        
               | nradov wrote:
               | The US military is starting to use some hybrid vehicles
               | to improve fuel logistics and reduce operating noise. But
               | pure electric ground vehicles are obviously a stupid idea
               | for combat usage due to charging issues.
        
               | amalcon wrote:
               | Short version is that you can't rely on the power grid or
               | other centralized generation. Centralized infrastructure
               | may not even be available, but if it is then the enemy
               | can target it.
        
               | linksnapzz wrote:
               | Everything you purchase over the course of a day was
               | transported by a diesel truck at some point.
        
               | mikestew wrote:
               | It wasn't transported with the neighbor's truck down the
               | street that has a "defeat device".
        
               | nickff wrote:
               | Parent was talking about commercial diesel trucks which
               | do not comply with the same regulations as passenger
               | vehicles, and the article talks about stock non-
               | compliance. Why are you changing the subject?
        
               | KennyBlanken wrote:
               | Which likely was very polluting, because thanks to
               | bitching by the trucking industry, they get a pass on
               | emissions via "gliders."
               | 
               | They can buy a brand new truck sans engine and drop some
               | terribly polluting piece of crap from several decades ago
               | and bypass all modern emissions regulations.
        
               | Gibbon1 wrote:
               | EV's and Hybrids get better mileage and pollute less.
               | 
               | It's funny how the Clinton admin forced a golden egg into
               | GM's hands (the EV1) and GM tossed it away in disgust
               | when Bush was elected.
        
             | rurban wrote:
             | VW? Everyone who used the Bosch ECU cheated. VW was just
             | the biggest who got caught and had to go to jail therefore.
             | All the others, which were more guilty than the VW execs
             | are still free.
             | 
             | And the politicians which sanctioned these special diesel
             | tests were not even named. Nor all the other countries who
             | also choose the European Standard (not testing diesel
             | engines) over the US Standard.
        
               | KennyBlanken wrote:
               | Not just Bosch ECUs, not just European car companies, and
               | this shit has been going on for decades. _All_ the car
               | companies do it and have since at least the 90 's. The
               | proof is in the ROM dumps of all the various cars - the
               | tuners can point to two sets of tables of fuel
               | mixture/timing maps, one for when the ECU thinks it's
               | being emissions tested and one for regular use.
               | 
               | As early as the late 90's tuners offered features where
               | doing something with the cruise control buttonss which
               | would switch the engine computer back to stock
               | programming to pass emissions, run on cheaper gas, or
               | fool the dealer if it went in for service. How does
               | everyone think they were able to do stuff like that
               | without any hardware mods?
               | 
               | Oh, and all the car companies were self-reporting their
               | CO2 emissions in the EU for decades. When EU regulators
               | actually got around to testing cars, shockigly, the
               | companies were lying.
               | 
               | It's basically accepted at this point that Telsa lies
               | about their range and efficiency numbers, and recently
               | there's evidence they have been fucking with people's
               | odometers for the purpose of getting them out of warranty
               | quicker.
               | 
               | Ferrari have all sorts of terms and prohibitions on
               | things journalists can't do with their cars - one being
               | track lap time testing. Why? Because they got caught by
               | Top Gear specially modifying their cars for the Top Gear
               | test circuit, as well as using tires that aren't on the
               | production vehicles - and when Top Gear called them out,
               | Ferrari permanently banned them *and have gone so far as
               | to prohibit Ferrari owners from allowing Top Gear staff
               | access to the owner's vehicles for testing, under threat
               | of being blacklisted. Now that they've been caught
               | cheating, they simply won't allow anyone to test their
               | cars versus anyone else's.
               | 
               | The wheel keeps on turning.
        
             | JW_00000 wrote:
             | Indeed, Dieselgate is 10 years ago. If they would've
             | suffered badly from it, we would've seen that by now. Sure,
             | they've had to pay fines and compensations, but that seems
             | to have been dealt with. In fact, you could argue the
             | opposite: Dieselgate forced VW to drop diesel and switch
             | focus to EVs [1, 2], earlier than they would've done
             | otherwise, giving them an advantage over other European and
             | American competitors (except Tesla). Of course, there are
             | plenty of other issues they've faced since them (inflation,
             | Chinese competition, tariffs, etc).
             | 
             | [1] https://www.forbes.com/sites/georgkell/2022/12/05/from-
             | emiss...
             | 
             | [2] https://www.ft.com/content/a2c7ca01-461c-4dc2-8006-ec1d
             | 6b61a...
        
               | codethief wrote:
               | > Of course, there are plenty of other issues they've
               | faced since them (inflation, Chinese competition,
               | tariffs, etc).
               | 
               | Yeah, they're actually not doing well at all right now.
        
             | izacus wrote:
             | Yes, VW has since then had mass layoffs and closed plants:
             | https://www.reuters.com/business/autos-
             | transportation/volksw...
        
           | wil421 wrote:
           | Diesel engines in the US have stricter regulations. I doubt
           | folks in the EU will start buying PowerStrokes, Cummins, or
           | Duramaxes anytime soon.
        
             | FireBeyond wrote:
             | How so? There is no way any of those engines would pass
             | emissions in the EU. How are US regulations even stricter?
        
               | pkaye wrote:
               | Back in 2015 US EPA NOx emission limits were tighter than
               | EU regulations.
               | 
               | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Volkswagen_emissions_scanda
               | l#U...
        
               | FireBeyond wrote:
               | I feel this also has a lot to do with the use of diesel.
               | The number of passenger vehicles and light duty pickups
               | in the US that actually use diesel is a fraction of what
               | it was in Europe.
               | 
               | The emission limits being for ULEV vehicles, I don't
               | think I have seen a ULEV truck - indeed California
               | classifies most under the LEV banner.
               | 
               | None of this is to change the point around nitrous oxide
               | emissions - the environment doesn't care whether it came
               | from a VW TDI or a F350, just the amount.
               | 
               | But it is also far far easier to implement such low
               | emission standards in the US because we just don't really
               | use diesel like that.
               | 
               | And when you get to the heavy duty pickups (F250, F350,
               | etc.), then most of that goes out of the window.
        
             | testing22321 wrote:
             | They are not stricter, just different.
             | 
             | US emissions standards don't allow some things that euro6+
             | does, and visa versa.
             | 
             | There is an effort to make them overlap to make it easier
             | to meet both standards.
        
           | pqtyw wrote:
           | What US competitors? Tesla is the only single American
           | company that has had any success besides maybe Ford (but Ford
           | Europe has a similar relationship to it's American parent
           | company that Opel and GM used to have i.e. in a large part
           | it's an European company)
        
             | neilv wrote:
             | I'm not sure only the German market was meant by OP.
             | 
             | VW has international sales, and OP's implication might've
             | been that Germany has a national interest in VW being
             | competitive.
        
               | pqtyw wrote:
               | > only the German market
               | 
               | Well yes, I of course meant the entire EU+UK market.
               | Regardless besides US and a handful of other countries VW
               | is hardly competing that much with any American car
               | companies anywhere (besides Tesla).
               | 
               | American car makers are still struggling a lot more in
               | relative market share terms (GM+Ford+Tesla barely had
               | over 33% in 2024 in the US). While VW alone had 26% in
               | EU/UK/EFTA (just German companies have 39% of the entire
               | market there)
        
           | oblio wrote:
           | VW has just become the #1 EV seller in Europe.
        
         | kunzhi wrote:
         | Well, as everyone knows, accountability really stifles
         | innovation. All my libertarian friends tell me that it'd be
         | better to privatize it rather than trying to legislate
         | morality.
        
           | bombcar wrote:
           | Luigi as privatized accountability?
        
             | jxjnskkzxxhx wrote:
             | If powerful people were afraid they would be a lot less
             | unhinged.
        
               | weard_beard wrote:
               | It's true. The only check on most corporate fraud is an
               | engineer with an Annecdote of real consequences.
        
               | philwelch wrote:
               | This isn't how human psychology works at all.
        
               | mg794613 wrote:
               | This isn't how _normal_ human psychology works at all.
               | 
               | We're talking about sociopaths, not people like you and
               | me.
               | 
               | How much of a percentage that is on that level, we can
               | guess.
        
               | jxjnskkzxxhx wrote:
               | Wanna share with us what makes you qualified to make such
               | definitive statements on human psychology?
        
               | philwelch wrote:
               | You don't have to be an expert to know that fear and
               | panic don't make people hinged, they make them even more
               | unhinged.
               | 
               | In particular, terroristic violence almost always incites
               | spiteful reaction against the perpetrators and anyone
               | associated with them.
        
               | const_cast wrote:
               | I mean, in the past we used to just hang or bomb rich
               | people that got too close to the sun.
               | 
               | People like Carnegie built 1500 public libraries because
               | he knew the game. He knew that his position as part of
               | the ultra-wealthy made him a target, and he had to toe a
               | line. He need to maximize exploitation but not too much,
               | so as to not cause a stir. He did a pretty good job. Some
               | people didn't do such a good job - we don't hear about
               | them because they and their families were murdered.
               | 
               | Rich people today are much safer, mostly due to people
               | being better people and technology.
        
               | SpicyLemonZest wrote:
               | I don't think that's accurate at all. It's true that rich
               | people in Carnegie's day had more concern about organized
               | violence against them, but most of them preferred to deal
               | with it by getting the Pinkertons or the military to stop
               | you from organizing _anything_ against them. Late 1800s
               | labor disputes killed a lot more workers than
               | millionaires.
        
               | philwelch wrote:
               | Gilded Age industrialists in America weren't murdered by
               | angry mobs, that's just a sick terroristic left wing
               | fantasy.
        
         | SoftTalker wrote:
         | SBF is in prison, so it happens sometimes.
        
           | jxjnskkzxxhx wrote:
           | Usually it happens only if you steal from investors. Stealing
           | from consumers is fine.
        
             | _DeadFred_ wrote:
             | Stealing from employees is just normal business in the US.
             | $1.5 billion in stolen wages were recovered for US workers
             | between 2021 and 2023. Imagine how much wasn't recovered.
             | It is often the least able to take action/most in need of
             | every dollar of their income that are stolen from. You can
             | tell a lot about a society by how it treats those with the
             | least power versus those with power.
             | 
             | https://www.epi.org/publication/wage-theft-2021-23/
        
               | nickff wrote:
               | Stealing from employers is also quite normalized, and
               | almost nobody goes to prison for doing very little work,
               | spending most of their day on social media (especially
               | common for remote work).
        
               | Teever wrote:
               | That isn't theft.
               | 
               | If an employee completes all the work assigned to them
               | and passes performance reviews then what you're
               | describing is a suboptimal use of the employees on the
               | part of the employer.
        
               | SoftTalker wrote:
               | Real theft by employees is also extremely common.
               | Especially in retail and food service.
        
               | lostlogin wrote:
               | > retail and food service.
               | 
               | Two industries that typically pay significantly less than
               | a living wage and which have a reputation for treating
               | their employees like absolute dirt.
               | 
               | Would you respect your employer if they didn't respect
               | you?
        
               | AuryGlenz wrote:
               | My sister was a waitress at Red Lobster in somewhat of a
               | tourism city and made absolute bank. She still stole
               | stuff like cutlery, salt shakers, etc. Let's not pretend
               | that most people that are stealing are Robin Hood types.
        
               | reactordev wrote:
               | Target has a whole surveillance department just for this
        
               | Teever wrote:
               | When this conversation comes up it is typically mentioned
               | that employers have mechanisms of enforcement that are
               | tied to their basic accounting required for taxes as well
               | as surveillance cameras that are also meant to watch
               | customers for theft. They also have the ability to
               | contact law enforcement and have their employees arrested
               | for theft.
               | 
               | There is an asymmetry in this relationship however where
               | employees don't practically have recourse when their
               | employers steal from them.
        
               | triceratops wrote:
               | And is treated as a criminal matter. But the manager
               | telling employees to clock out before their shift ends is
               | a civil matter.
        
               | SoftTalker wrote:
               | Most often an employee caught stealing is just fired. If
               | there's significant value involved perhaps the police
               | would get a call.
               | 
               | Telling an employee to clock out and keep working is a
               | labor law violation, that's not just a civil matter. It
               | happens, but often with the agreement of the employee.
               | I.e. "I know you're about to hit overtime, so if you
               | clock out I'll give you cash, otherwise I have to send
               | you home."
        
               | triceratops wrote:
               | The point is the police will take a complaint in the case
               | of employee theft.
               | 
               | And the "agreement" of the employee is utterly
               | meaningless because it's not a negotiation between
               | equals. Coercion is more accurate.
               | 
               | > labor law violation, that's not just a civil matter
               | 
               | So people go to jail over it? It goes on their criminal
               | record and comes up in background checks?
               | 
               | > I'll give you cash
               | 
               | This part sounds like pure fantasy. And the cash would be
               | less than overtime pay (otherwise why even make the
               | offer) so it's still wage theft.
        
               | try_the_bass wrote:
               | > If an employee completes all the work assigned to them
               | 
               | I don't think this was implied in their statement?
        
               | const_cast wrote:
               | Even if it wasn't, being a poor worker still isn't theft,
               | and it's the companies responsibility to both measure and
               | correct employee performance. If they're bad at that and
               | these things go under the radar, that's still on the
               | employer.
               | 
               | The only way employees can steal is if they steal time,
               | like clocking in then going home. Salary employees are
               | not paid by time, so they cannot steal time. Employers
               | want to have their cake and eat it too - they want to
               | consider salary employees not time based when it comes to
               | OT, but when it comes to day-to-day they DO want them to
               | be considered time-based. Not how it works. Your workers
               | being bad at their job is not theft, it's just
               | incompetence.
        
               | exe34 wrote:
               | Working too hard is rewarded with more work.
        
               | nickff wrote:
               | I agree, but this point seems to be orthogonal to the
               | matters being discussed here. Your point is roughly
               | analogous to 'providing too much consumer surplus is
               | rewarded with more customers'.
        
               | speff wrote:
               | That seems like a really small number? To compare - total
               | US retail shrink in those years combined was a little
               | over $300B[0] - averaging about 1.5% of sales. $1.5B
               | seems like a rounding error when talking in those terms.
               | 
               | [0]: https://www.wsj.com/articles/as-retailers-cite-
               | rising-theft-...
        
               | ljf wrote:
               | I think their point was that this was all that was
               | recovered, from the approx $20b stolen each year through
               | wage theft. I believe wage theft is one of the largest
               | value crime by $ amount in the US - but is very rarely
               | prosecuted.
               | 
               | https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wage_theft
               | 
               | Actually it turns out fraud and white collar crime takes
               | more out of the American economy.
        
               | speff wrote:
               | I skimmed the article - any significant concrete numbers
               | were all sourced to the EPI site linked by the GP.
               | There's an unsourced FBI chart that says >19B in 2012,
               | but I couldn't find the actual numbers when I looked.
               | Frankly - I don't trust this claim if the only one
               | actually putting big numbers on it is one publication.
               | 
               | EDIT: I'm going to cast more suspicion on the FBI graph.
               | According to a 2022 report[0], the number of robbery
               | offenses reported in 2018 was 1691 cases. The median loss
               | being about $2k. Doing some caveman-math, that's about
               | $3B lost to robbery in 2018. Unless we went through some
               | insane spike of lawlessness between 2012 and 2018, I
               | don't see how $340m in 2012 jumps to $3B in 2018.
               | 
               | [0]:
               | https://www.ussc.gov/sites/default/files/pdf/research-
               | and-pu...
        
               | microtherion wrote:
               | 1691 * $2k is about $3M, not $3B.
        
               | _DeadFred_ wrote:
               | You are comparing ACTUAL recovered wage theft numbers to
               | industry trade group estimated numbers and making
               | claims/drawing conclusions off of two totally differently
               | types of numbers?
               | 
               | Why not compare recovered to recovered, which are pretty
               | close to each other?
               | https://hayesinternational.com/news/annual-retail-theft-
               | surv...
               | 
               | That business appears to steal as much from their workers
               | as criminal theft rings surely is kind of a big deal
               | (based on the matching ACTUAL recovery numbers).
        
               | throwpoaster wrote:
               | Let's be conservative by taking GDP for only the middle
               | year. In 2022 American GDP was 26 trillion (rounded
               | down). Let's also gross up the stolen wages from your
               | comment to 2.6 billion.
               | 
               | That's 0.01% -- one percent of one percent. That's a
               | background noise level, or simple error rate level, or
               | rounding error level. And because of our conservative
               | assumptions, over those three years GDP is actually maybe
               | 3x higher and the reported wage theft per year maybe 20%
               | of the figure used, so it's more like approx 0.002%.
               | 
               | If wage theft is "just normal business in the US" it's
               | not a very big business!
        
               | squigz wrote:
               | I'm sorry, but I don't quite understand your point? Does
               | it being a small % of the GDP matter to those stolen
               | from? Does it mean we shouldn't attempt to remedy it?
        
               | throwpoaster wrote:
               | We should care about it 0.002% as much as we care about
               | other economic problems.
        
               | ToValueFunfetti wrote:
               | Not quite- from a strictly financial perspective, it
               | means we should care 0.002% as much as we care about an
               | intervention that doubles the GDP or eliminates 100% it.
               | Neither exists, so we're better off comparing to other
               | theft- this is about 15% of numbers for retail shrink,
               | 50% of reported personal theft, so this suggests we
               | should care proportionally.
               | 
               | But I don't know about the strict financial analysis. I'm
               | pretty sure it would tell us to have negative care about
               | a serial killer that targets the homeless.
        
               | ljf wrote:
               | Wage theft takes more money out of people's pockets than
               | robbery, auto theft, burglary and larceny combined.
               | 
               | Should we not care about them as they are such a small
               | part of gdp?
               | 
               | Wage theft is about $20b a year.
               | 
               | https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wage_theft
        
               | spookie wrote:
               | We all know employees generate more revenue than what
               | they're paid. Otherwise you wouldn't have a successful
               | business.
               | 
               | Comparing wages with GDP in this context doesn't prove
               | anything.
        
               | _DeadFred_ wrote:
               | The RECOVERED number matches retail theft recovery
               | numbers. So it is AT LEAST on par with organized and
               | unorganized criminal retail theft. I'd say that is
               | significant (I would argue retail theft if much easier to
               | catch and pursued much more often, making wage theft a
               | larger issue) especially as it's happening within the
               | structure of/approved by businesses.
               | 
               | https://hayesinternational.com/news/annual-retail-theft-
               | surv...
        
             | bilekas wrote:
             | This comment is so on point, reminds me of the old one
             | about if you owe the bank 500k they own you, but if you owe
             | then 2Billion you own them. Something along those lines,
             | maybe I'm only noticing it more recently but it seems to me
             | that there's also a higher prevalence of "Non class
             | actions" clauses in terms and conditions these days too.
             | 
             | It's amazing how badly customers are willing to be treated
             | but at the same time, you're not obliged to buy a service
             | so I can't really rant too much.
             | 
             | Edit : Found the quote and unironically it's credited as an
             | American Proverb.
             | 
             | > If you owe the bank a hundred thousand dollars, the bank
             | owns you. If you owe the bank a hundred million dollars,
             | you own the bank. -- American Proverb.
        
               | teddyh wrote:
               | Previously discussed here on HN:
               | <https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=41798027>
        
             | tyre wrote:
             | Matt Levine:
             | 
             | "I find all of this so weird because of how it elevates
             | finance. [Various cases] imply that we are not entitled to
             | be protected from pollution as citizens, or as humans.
             | [Another] implies that we are not entitled to be told the
             | truth as citizens. (Which: is true!) Rather, in each case,
             | we are only entitled to be protected from lies as
             | shareholders. The great harm of pollution, or of political
             | dishonesty, is that it might lower the share prices of the
             | companies we own."
        
               | Brian_K_White wrote:
               | Similarly Elizabeth Holmes (In jail, but not for
               | providing bad medical services.)
        
               | tough wrote:
               | Her husband is going for v2 with her advising from there
               | lol
        
               | immibis wrote:
               | Obviously the solution is to buy one share in every
               | company.
        
             | benoau wrote:
             | We're in the midst of watching Apple get away with criminal
             | contempt for forcing consumers to be as ignorant as
             | possible of their IAP fees - including forcing Patreon to
             | exclusively use them while under court order to allow them
             | to link to their own payments!
        
               | M95D wrote:
               | The american corporations were always "special".
        
           | 3eb7988a1663 wrote:
           | SBF stole from rich people. Strategic error on his part.
        
             | tcgv wrote:
             | True, but context matters. SBF was running a disruptive
             | crypto startup that drew intense scrutiny, and his
             | operations were so amateurish that proving misconduct was
             | straightforward. Traditional corporations tend to reduce
             | the risk of prison-worthy exposure thanks to tighter
             | compliance and better legal insulation, even when the harm
             | is just as large.
        
             | fuddy wrote:
             | His larger problem was doing everything a lawyer would tell
             | you not to do. The world and a sufficient portion of any 12
             | person subsample could have accepted that these were
             | suckers far more readily than Madoff's victims. But he
             | broke every rule about talking, letting people know he was
             | making up required departments, mixing conflicts of
             | interest, etc.
        
           | HenryBemis wrote:
           | With the political tensions in the US (I'm not trying to fan
           | any flames - wait to read the full thing), I think that SBF
           | made the mistake to 'bet on both teams - with a smile', and
           | he is punished because teamA that eventually won punished him
           | for funding teamB as well. So a friend of our enemy is our
           | enemy (!?). Also, he may have been seen as a 'traitor' by
           | both teams. I know about the case what I've read in some news
           | sites and Coffeezilla/Voidzilla, and it seems like the guy
           | should be behind bars. And with that said, I rarely celebrate
           | when someone loses their freedom. I mostly feel sorry for
           | them and their life's choices (and the fact that with being
           | in prison he made his own life hell, and put in some very
           | difficult position everyone near/around him).
        
           | AtlasBarfed wrote:
           | He'll be pardoned.
           | 
           | But at least he's there for a bit
        
         | ferguess_k wrote:
         | Qie (Steal)Gou (hook)Zhe (people)Zhu (gets a death sentence)
         | 
         | Qie (Steal)Guo (country)Zhe (people)Hou (gets to be the king)
        
           | OJFord wrote:
           | Is this missing a sentence like 'there is a saying in
           | mandarin:'?
        
             | docsaintly wrote:
             | I think they meant: Qie Gou Zhe Zhu ,Qie Guo Zhe Hou
             | qiegouzhe zhu, qieguozhe hou He who steals a belt buckle
             | pays with his life; he who steals a state gets to be a
             | feudal lord.
             | 
             | Yes, it is a Chinese idiom.
        
               | anthk wrote:
               | The same in Spanish. Steal a hen, get a harsh sentence.
               | Steal millions, you are now a respectable 'businessman'.
        
               | atrocious wrote:
               | The law locks up the man or woman Who steals the goose
               | from off the common But leaves the greater villain loose
               | Who steals the common from off the goose.
        
               | Gibbon1 wrote:
               | Kill a man you're a murderer. Kill millions and you're a
               | statesman.
        
               | moomin wrote:
               | Pretty sure that's known as The Blair Doctrine.
        
               | appreciatorBus wrote:
               | Or the Stalin doctrine, "One death is a tragedy, a
               | million deaths a statistic"
        
           | echelon wrote:
           | This is a remarkably good idiom that rings true.
           | 
           | Similar to Paul Getty's quote, "If you owe the bank $100,
           | that's your problem. If you owe the bank $100 million, that's
           | the bank's problem."
           | 
           | But in this case, it cuts much deeper and darker.
        
             | Brian_K_White wrote:
             | I think that's a pretty different concept being expressed
             | by that one.
             | 
             | The others are about getting away with something by just
             | making the crime big enough that it's evaluated and handled
             | in a totally different arena.
             | 
             | The bank can still destroy the rest of your life, so you
             | didn't get away with anything (setting aside bankrupcy and
             | how you can actually usually start over, and that may or
             | may not be all that terrible for you).
             | 
             | The banking one is just saying that the bank can not get
             | 100 million from you no matter what they do, because it
             | simply doesn't exist. In that case, everyone still agrees
             | you still owe it and they are entitled to it. You didn't
             | gain anything by going big enough. And it's not really true
             | that it's the banks problem instead of yours. The bank has
             | a problem, but you still also have a problem.
        
               | cjbenedikt wrote:
               | "...setting aside bankrupcy and how you can actually
               | usually start over, and that may or may not be all that
               | terrible for you..." You might even be elected
               | president...:-p
        
               | bryanrasmussen wrote:
               | that's really not what it means, it means that if you owe
               | the bank enough money (which is probably more than 100
               | million nowadays for any significant bank) then it is you
               | in the position of power in relation to the bank, when
               | the bank comes and says hey we need the money sure you
               | have the "problem" that you need to pay it, but let's say
               | you can pay it no sweat, but you'd rather not because
               | reasons so you say hmm, I think I would like to
               | renegotiate the interest and wait a year before paying,
               | and unless things are very extreme the bank will probably
               | have to acquiesce, if they don't they are basically
               | letting the world know hey, we have a 100 million dollar
               | problem, but until they make that announcement that 100
               | million is just another asset the bank has.
               | 
               | If you owe the bank enough money, you have the power in
               | the relationship in most cases.
        
           | achierius wrote:
           | "He who steals from one citizen," said Cato, "ends his days
           | in fetters and chains; but he who steals from all ends them
           | in purple and gold."
        
             | mananaysiempre wrote:
             | > "Fures," inquit [Cato], "privatorum furtorum in nervo
             | atque in compedibus aetatem agunt, fures publici in auro
             | atque in purpura."
             | 
             | A. Gellius, _Noctes Atticae_ , XI, 18, 18.
             | 
             | https://penelope.uchicago.edu/Thayer/L/Roman/Texts/Gellius/
             | 1...
        
         | MPSFounder wrote:
         | At least something came out of it. In 08, all the executives
         | that tanked our economy retired and are enjoying manors in the
         | Hampton and socialize in country clubs on Long Island. Cheney,
         | an oil executive, started a war based on lies when he landed in
         | the highest office of the land, and now owns hundreds of acres
         | in Wyoming based on oil profits Halliburton extracted (and paid
         | him as a consultant for 5years after his VP position, whatever
         | that means). I wish we did a better job in the US sending our
         | criminals to prison, but I guess a neoliberal capitalist
         | society will always favor a) high fines over justice for white
         | collar crimes, b) as little attention as possible, given a
         | supposedly free media can make a raucous encore and draw more
         | attention. It is a facet of the trade.
        
         | tsoukase wrote:
         | Auto industry is the material God of Germany. Similar to SW
         | companies in the US. These people have immunity solely because
         | they support the system.
         | 
         | Do you think the US would extradit top level FAANG people if
         | they indirectly harmed some foreign country? No way!
        
         | alanl wrote:
         | Ireland jailed a 3 or 4 bankers after the crash.
         | 
         | https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/David_Drumm
         | 
         | It took 10 yrs to convict them mind you, and as I understand it
         | they're all out now.
        
           | hermitcrab wrote:
           | I stand corrected. Thanks.
        
         | GuB-42 wrote:
         | And I think there is a good reason for that. When a company
         | steals billions from customers, the entire company is
         | responsible, and the entire company profits from the crime. So
         | why single out a few executives? Everyone shall be punished:
         | the CEO of course, but also every employee, every shareholder.
         | You have a single VW stock, you are responsible too.
         | 
         | So, how do you punish everyone fairly? By fining the company
         | for a large amount of money. Shareholders lose their value,
         | employees don't get their raise, and execs won't get their
         | bonus, there is a good chance they get fired too. Companies are
         | for profit, it is even more true for public companies, for
         | which profit is their duty to their shareholders. So hit where
         | it hurts, that is profits.
         | 
         | As for jailing CEOs, what will it bring? Don't forget that a
         | CEO is just an employee, hired by the directors to maximize
         | profits for the shareholders. If the entire company is corrupt,
         | everyone will be more than happy to hire scapegoat CEOs if it
         | can serve their interests. Jailing them will solve nothing, it
         | may even be counter productive as those who are most likely to
         | get that job are people who are ready to risk prison to win
         | big, a crime lord profile.
         | 
         | There are still reasons to jail the CEO, but only if he
         | personally deceived the rest of the company and shareholders,
         | but that is effectively the same as stealing from the company.
        
           | Neywiny wrote:
           | My issue with your comment is that you're taking the humanity
           | out of it. A person or group of people decided to commit
           | crimes. Go to jail. If a group of people hired a scapegoat,
           | that group still would've conspired to commit crimes. That's
           | a punishable offense. Punish them. You can punish a board of
           | directors. You can persecute a C-suite. They're all humans.
           | That's the way justice is. Nobody is above the law.
        
             | itsanaccount wrote:
             | Corporate death penalty. I want to see these groups of
             | "shareholder value" get destroyed. Equal to a damage of a
             | normal death penalty to an individual. Spread the
             | organization to the winds.
             | 
             | If that means a "company" becomes smaller, with more
             | isolated crews run by their own leadership, good.
        
               | Neywiny wrote:
               | I could see there being an issue with too much forced
               | collusion if companies are too small to operate. Like how
               | a lot of companies put all the blame on a profitless,
               | employee-less "subsidiary" and say "oh no, we can't pay a
               | fine, we have no money. We gave all our profits to
               | Company Inc Ltd, we're just Company Inc." We'd need to
               | fix that first. Then corporate death penalty. Which I
               | believe does exist but isn't used very often. I think
               | some court rulings have forbidden operations in certain
               | states.
        
           | pqtyw wrote:
           | > So, how do you punish everyone fairly?
           | 
           | By punishing those who decided to commit the crime?
           | Indirectly benefiting from somebody's else illegal actions is
           | not a crime (you might be required to pay it back but that's
           | it..).
           | 
           | Generally executives are the ones who benefit the most of
           | these case and then leave the rest of of the company and the
           | shareholders on the hook while they move on or retire.
           | 
           | > and execs won't get their bonus,
           | 
           | What if they already have their bonuses? Generally it might
           | take years for any investigation to conclude, often
           | executives who benefited from it couldn't care less what
           | happens to the company they don't work at anymore anyway.
        
           | anigbrowl wrote:
           | No. Decision making authority is concentrated in executives
           | and managers, and likewise so should the lgal responsibility
           | be. Spreading it evenly across the whole entity such that the
           | janitor is punished in the same proportion as the individuals
           | who decide to commit fraud is nonsensical. shareholders
           | should certainly take a hit, but consequences should be
           | administered in proportion to the degree of authority
           | exercised in the commission of the crime.
        
         | mcv wrote:
         | Most blatant case was when the HSBC bank was found guilty of
         | laundering billions for Mexican drug cartels. Any person found
         | guilty of that, would have gone to prison for years, but nobody
         | at HSBC went to prison, and the bank was fined mere millions
         | for the crime of laundering billions. I'm sure that taught them
         | a lesson.
         | 
         | So I'm glad finally seeing some repercussions for corporate
         | crime.
        
         | lo_zamoyski wrote:
         | > the 2008 banking disaster
         | 
         | We would do well to overhaul the banking system by
         | categorically eliminating usury and much speculative nonsense.
         | It is incredible the amount of rationalization that goes into
         | propping up these morally indefensible practices. Criminalizing
         | them will go a long way to eliminate many legitimized patterns
         | of economic exploitation.
        
         | EasyMark wrote:
         | Same in USA, tons of corps misappropriated funds that were
         | meant to help keep employees hired. Almost no prosecutionsat
         | all and the records the government kept were abysmal
        
       | wildrice wrote:
       | I always thought there was a tremendous irony in Germany's far
       | left heavily protesting Tesla for Elon's speech while their own
       | corporate giant committed widespread emissions fraud for years
        
         | bantunes wrote:
         | Why is this irony? One is being done out in the open and the
         | other was unknown for years, so unless "the far left" knew
         | about the defeat devices, this is a false dichotomy.
        
           | moooo99 wrote:
           | Its a false dichotomy either way because VW and the handling
           | of the administration back then was heavily criticized by
           | many parties, including left leaning parties like the greens
        
         | johannes1234321 wrote:
         | The Scandal was big in Germany and contrary to complaints about
         | Musk there was quite a lot legal action against VW (while law
         | has some restrictions preventing huge damage claims as in the
         | US) so I don't really understand the comparison.
        
         | Flemlo wrote:
         | These are two issues independent of each other.
         | 
         | One argument doesn't make the other in any way worse or better
         | 
         | I'm a German, I was not aware that VW was doing this until it
         | came out and it was a huge blow out.
         | 
         | Do you think people just test their cars fume output?! You do
         | understand that the software was build to detect being on a
         | test stand right?
         | 
         | Who reverse engineers software like this...
        
         | JHer wrote:
         | I don't understand. It's not like the far left is Volkswagen's
         | fan club?
        
         | croes wrote:
         | There were multiple protests in 2016.
         | 
         | They protest every time a company fucks up like that.
        
         | rat87 wrote:
         | Elon campaigned for the German far right party which basically
         | everyone including Germans conservative party regards as
         | fascist. It's not a far left thing to oppose that
        
       | Tomte wrote:
       | And one engineer went on vacation to America. Congratulations,
       | you've won seven years in a foreign prison!
       | 
       | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oliver_Schmidt_(engineer)
        
         | mschuster91 wrote:
         | It's the other way around, he was US-based and went for a
         | vacation to Germany.
        
           | Tomte wrote:
           | He used to work in the US, but at the time of the US
           | prosecution and his arrest he was back in Wolfsburg, and the
           | vacation was in Florida.
           | 
           | The English Wikipedia article isn't terribly clear about
           | that.
        
           | dehugger wrote:
           | He is a German national though. Bit of a confusing situation.
        
           | bhelkey wrote:
           | Do you have a source for this?
           | 
           | CNN reports that he was on vacation to Florida and was
           | arrested in the airport awaiting a flight home to Germany
           | [1].
           | 
           | [1] https://money.cnn.com/2017/03/17/news/companies/volkswage
           | n-e...
        
         | xrd wrote:
         | Arrested in a men's bathroom, no less!
        
           | kotaKat wrote:
           | "Conspiracy to defraud the United States" is a more dignified
           | charge to get in an airport bathroom than what happens when
           | you have a "wide stance" as a Senator.
        
         | keeganpoppen wrote:
         | that wikipedia article is atrociously written holy cow. "pawn
         | sacrifice"?!?
        
           | fch42 wrote:
           | "Bauernopfer" (German for "pawn sacrifice") is a common term
           | in German to mean "sacrificing someone insignificant to get
           | the big guy out of trouble".
           | 
           | So the English translation might be machine-done; in the
           | original German, the word makes a lot of sense and carries a
           | definite meaning.
        
       | hollerith wrote:
       | The OP does not mention the name of one VW exec (Oliver Schmidt,
       | the head of VW's environmental and engineering office in
       | Michigan, a German citizen) convicted in US Federal Court in 2017
       | for his part in the scandal. He was released after serving about
       | 3.5 years in prison.
       | 
       | A second exec sentenced in the US (also in 2017) was James Liang,
       | also a German citizen, who prosecutors say "was a pivotal figure
       | in designing the systems used to make Volkswagen diesels appear
       | to comply with U.S. pollution standards, when instead they could
       | emit up to 40 times the allowed levels of smog-forming compounds
       | in normal driving." He cooperated with prosecutors and was
       | released from prison in 2019.
       | 
       | I vaguely remember that the top execs were charged by US
       | (Federal) prosecutors (in 2017) but the German government refused
       | to extradict. Schmidt was arrested and tried only because he made
       | the mistake of traveling to the US after the scandal came to
       | light (although of course the German Court might have gotten
       | around to trying him like they tried the execs in this current
       | news story).
        
         | jillesvangurp wrote:
         | Deutsche Welle has a bit more detail and also discusses the
         | CEO:
         | 
         | https://www.dw.com/en/4-ex-vw-managers-guilty-of-fraud-over-...
         | 
         | Apparently he has some health issues which caused the case
         | against him to be suspended. That might resume later but
         | unclear right now. He's 78 at this point.
        
           | bhelkey wrote:
           | The VX emission cheating scandal came to light a decade ago
           | in 2015. If a 78 year old is too old to prosecute, Germany
           | should have prosecuted him a decade ago when he was 68.
           | 
           | Instead, Germany refused to extradite him to the US to stand
           | trial in 2017 [1].
           | 
           | [1] https://www.justice.gov/archives/opa/pr/former-ceo-
           | volkswage...
        
             | ratatoskrt wrote:
             | Many countries do not legally permit the extradition of
             | their own citizens. In Germany, extradition is generally
             | only allowed to other EU countries, which meant the German
             | government's options were quite limited.
        
       | gjvc wrote:
       | Next, bring back hanging for corporate manslaughter.
        
       | jacknews wrote:
       | What about major shareholders?
       | 
       | Presumably they were blissfully unaware, and were simply pleased
       | when VW delivered more profits, as demanded.
        
         | transcriptase wrote:
         | And?
        
         | _DeadFred_ wrote:
         | Instead of fines the government should be granted an ownership
         | percentage in companies that break that law (thus diluting
         | ownership and directly impacting owners). That way the
         | punishment impacts shareholders/owners, but in way that keeps
         | corporate protections so that society can continue to function.
        
           | jeffrallen wrote:
           | And for egregious behavior like Chevron in Ecuador, the
           | government should cut up and sell the company in a million
           | useless pieces completely destroying all shareholder value.
           | 
           | I wish someone would give me a chance to vote to repeal the
           | personal death penalty and create the corporate death
           | penalty.
        
             | SpicyLemonZest wrote:
             | The Chevron Ecuador story is a great example of how
             | impossible discussions on corporate misconduct can get.
             | Chevron has successfully argued in both the US and an
             | international tribunal that the Ecuadorian judgment was
             | procured through corruption and bribery. But oil companies
             | are very unpopular, so many people who encounter the case
             | assume that Chevron must have been in the wrong, and the
             | lawyer who was disbarred and jailed for his role in that
             | corruption must be right.
        
         | triceratops wrote:
         | That's what the "limited" in "limited company" means. Blame the
         | board members and executive management, sure. But it's hard to
         | go beyond that.
        
         | constantcrying wrote:
         | >Presumably they were blissfully unaware, and were simply
         | pleased when VW delivered more profits, as demanded.
         | 
         | It is kind of ridiculous to believe that either the government
         | of lower Saxony or the UAE or the Porsche Piech family were
         | aware of this.
        
       | MortyWaves wrote:
       | The last time I read any updates on this, everyone on both sides
       | of the legal process were trying to single out scapegoat
       | individual software engineers and rake them over the coals. Did
       | something change?
        
         | johnklos wrote:
         | I don't think software engineers were independently looking at
         | emissions data and unilaterally decided to "fix" the emissions
         | shortcomings in software. I think they were told by others to
         | do that. It's good that Germany is going after the people who
         | decided that fraud was the answer.
        
           | bhelkey wrote:
           | > It's good that Germany is going after the people who
           | decided that fraud
           | 
           | When the VW scandal broke, the US indicted seven senior
           | executives. None of these seven were extradited to the US to
           | stand trial [1].
           | 
           | The VW scandal was made public in 2015 [2] and involved
           | cheating since 2009. Sentencing only two executives to jail a
           | decade after their wrong doing made international news does
           | not send a strong message.
           | 
           | [1] https://www.justice.gov/archives/opa/pr/former-ceo-
           | volkswage...
           | 
           | [2] https://www.bbc.com/news/business-34324772
        
         | bhelkey wrote:
         | When the VW scandal broke, the US indicted seven senior
         | executives [1]. Germany did not cooperate. None of these seven
         | were extradited to the US to stand trial.
         | 
         | One more mid level engineer involved in the scandal made the
         | mistake of taking a vacation to Florida. He was arrested in the
         | airport awaiting his flight home to Germany [2]. He was
         | sentenced to 84 months in prison but was let out after serving
         | half of that sentence [3].
         | 
         | [1] https://www.justice.gov/archives/opa/pr/former-ceo-
         | volkswage...
         | 
         | [2]
         | https://money.cnn.com/2017/03/17/news/companies/volkswagen-e...
         | 
         | [3] https://www.autonews.com/automakers/ex-vw-manager-schmidt-
         | ge...
        
       | sambeau wrote:
       | Can we so CrowdStrike next?
        
         | crop_rotation wrote:
         | While CrowdStrike was incompetent, this is remotely not the
         | same thing as what VW did. What CrowdStrike did should be best
         | punished by the market and in court by companies who were their
         | customers.
        
           | diego_sandoval wrote:
           | Crowdstrike stock price seems to be close to an all time
           | high.
        
             | jeroenhd wrote:
             | There are two or three companies that do what CrowdStrike
             | does on a scale CrowdStrike supports. Not necessarily on a
             | technical level, but on a CEO-goes-to-the-same-golf-clubs
             | level of business support. CrowdStrike was probably the
             | worst of the bunch, but any of them can cause the problems
             | CrowdStrike caused.
             | 
             | It'll happen again, though probably on a smaller scale.
             | Software like CrowdStrike's is a massive single point of
             | failure but spending twice the money to have a backup suite
             | on part of the network to maintain basic operations when
             | the primary suite crashes is not very popular. The short
             | hit to productivity is worth the emergency prep in terms of
             | financial output, and the people spending weeks on end
             | recovering systems are expendable anyway.
        
               | an0malous wrote:
               | "Competition is for losers"
        
         | paulddraper wrote:
         | Sure, if they broke any laws.
        
       | hardlianotion wrote:
       | Nice.
        
       | Mistletoe wrote:
       | We would see some world change finally if this became the norm.
       | Breaking the law in a corporate suit shouldn't be any different
       | than breaking the law as a soldier or citizen. Corporations have
       | been doing war crimes on us for quite some time now.
        
         | amadeuspagel wrote:
         | This is the norm.
        
       | Improvement wrote:
       | Better source to read without ads:
       | https://www.occrp.org/en/news/former-vw-managers-sentenced-o...
        
         | lblume wrote:
         | People still use the web without adblockers?
        
       | Drunk_Engineer wrote:
       | The headline says "execs" but I don't see any Board members
       | getting prison terms. Martin Winterkorn, the CEO, has basically
       | escaped prosecution altogether.
        
         | teruakohatu wrote:
         | It would be unlikely (not impossible) that board members would
         | be briefed about ongoing criminal behaviour, and certainly not
         | something so deep into operations as how the ECU is being
         | programmed.
         | 
         | Can a board member be reasonably responsible for the actions of
         | tens of thousands of employees if they have not explicitly
         | enabled or condoned criminal behaviour?
         | 
         | The person that would benefit the most would be a senior
         | executive who stands to gain a promotion, bonus or land an even
         | better job elsewhere.
         | 
         | A former prime minister of my country was fined over $6 million
         | for being on the board of a company what traded while
         | insolvent. Not a prison sentence but a harsh penalty for
         | someone that was not super rich (as far as I am aware).
        
           | triceratops wrote:
           | They should at least be barred from being board members for a
           | certain period of time.
        
         | bhelkey wrote:
         | The US indicted seven senior executives including Martin
         | Winterkorn in 2017 [1]. None of these seven were extradited
         | from Germany to the US to face trial.
         | 
         | [1] https://www.justice.gov/archives/opa/pr/former-ceo-
         | volkswage...
        
         | constantcrying wrote:
         | >but I don't see any Board members getting prison terms.
         | 
         | The head of development, a board member, got a suspended
         | sentence.
         | 
         | >Martin Winterkorn, the CEO, has basically escaped prosecution
         | altogether.
         | 
         | How so?
        
       | throwaway81523 wrote:
       | This article is better though nothing I've seen names the
       | executives (different media law maybe).
       | 
       | https://www.dw.com/en/4-ex-vw-managers-guilty-of-fraud-over-...
       | 
       | "A former head of diesel engine development was sentenced to four
       | and a half years in prison. The former head of drive electronics
       | received two years and seven months in prison.
       | 
       | The highest-ranking defendant, a former member of the Volkswagen
       | brand's development board, received one year and three months'
       | probation. A former department head was sentenced to one year and
       | ten months' probation."
       | 
       | Doesn't sound like it got near the C suite.
        
         | constantcrying wrote:
         | >Doesn't sound like it got near the C suite.
         | 
         | Your quote shows that it was the CTO who got the suspended
         | sentence and the trial for the CEO is pending. The head of the
         | board was indicted as well, but not convicted.
        
       | PaulKeeble wrote:
       | Two engineers that I know of got the following: James Liang got
       | 40 months Schmidt was sentenced to 84 months
       | 
       | Then the executives Jens Hadler four and a half years in prison
       | Hanno Jelden two years and seven months
       | 
       | Prosecutors are still investigating and trying to shake out more.
       | This appears to be a wide conspiracy within VW.
        
       | saravanan2661 wrote:
       | Where can one find these "defeat devices"? (asking for
       | educational purposes)
        
         | k4rli wrote:
         | IIRC it was just the firmware in Bosch ECUs.
        
         | constantcrying wrote:
         | The ECUs, the computer controlling the engine was programmed in
         | a way in which it could detect the conditions of a test being
         | run and alter it's behavior.
        
       | dbg31415 wrote:
       | Now do Boeing!
        
         | lysace wrote:
         | During this admin?
         | 
         | https://www.cnbc.com/2025/05/23/boeing-737-max-crashes-doj.h...
         | (3 days ago)
         | 
         | > Boeing, Justice Department reach deal to avoid prosecution
         | over deadly 737 Max crashes
         | 
         | See also: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=44078413 (15
         | comments)
         | 
         | It seems that at the very least manslaughter is legal in the US
         | now, provided you pay $1.28M per victim.
        
       | godelski wrote:
       | This is good to see. Often we see the scandal unfold but hear
       | very little about the followups. They're long, drawn out, and
       | incredibly boring. But at the end, there's something very
       | valuable.
       | 
       | Without these followups the public feel like they just get away,
       | and in some cases they do. I'd argue that without seeing the
       | punishment we are encouraging these crimes.
       | 
       | I'd much rather read this kind of news than whatever filler
       | bullshit is on the front page of the news now.
        
       | B1FF_PSUVM wrote:
       | FINALLY!
       | 
       | It's the least they could do for the reputation of German
       | engineering.
       | 
       | [ if (CAUGHT): toss an MBA on the barbie ]
        
         | DrNosferatu wrote:
         | #irony You mean it wasn't the doing of the Southern European
         | engineers at Volkswagen? #irony
        
       | WrongOnInternet wrote:
       | > The court sentenced two of the former executives to prison for
       | several years...
       | 
       | Anyone here know German? I couldn't find a good translation for
       | the number "several."
        
         | detaro wrote:
         | (I assume you ask about the exact numbers, not how to translate
         | it?) The actual prison sentences are 4.5 years for the former
         | head of diesel engine development, 2 years 7 months for the
         | former head of engine electronics. Two more got sentenced on
         | probation, a former (guessing at the translation here) Chief
         | R&D Officer for 1 year 3 months, a (unspecified in the source
         | I'm reading) department head 1 year 10 months.
         | 
         | Apparently 31 more people are targeted by further cases. (+
         | Winterkorn, but I wouldn't be surprised if he never makes it to
         | trial given it's been aborted twice already due to health
         | issues)
        
           | WrongOnInternet wrote:
           | Yes, thanks for doing the journalism that the author of the
           | story could not be bothered to do.
        
       | Animats wrote:
       | The head of Diesel engine development and the head of powertrain
       | electronics are going to jail. Two CEOs and the chairman got off.
        
       ___________________________________________________________________
       (page generated 2025-05-26 23:01 UTC)