Double Jeopardy?

[XZeroII]

Link Microsoft found guilty of violating antitrust law.
An individual may not be tried twice for the same crime. A corporation is considered a legal entity with the same status as an individual, so don't the same rules apply? This is also international, so the EU may not have a double jeopardy law, but since Microsoft has already been punished for it's crimes, shouldn't they be absolved from paying for their crime again? I realize that some people think that MS was not punished enough, but we can't just pick and choose what laws we want to obey and which we want to ignore. If the EU was trying them for a different crime other than the same ones they were convicted of here, then I would understand, but it's the same crime. This is why the double jeopardy law was created, to prevent people/entities from having to pay for their crimes more than once. Anyone have any thoughts? (legal thoughts, not MS rants).

 

[Viper GTS]

Think about this for a minute:

1) MS is not an individual
2) This is an EU court, not a US court

Why would double jeapordy even REMOTELY apply?

Viper GTS

 

[Spudd]

Microsoft does business internationally. Hence, they are subject to other countries' laws if they do business there. There is no double jeopardy issue here, as they were tried in the American judicial system. The EU has its own system.

 

[AkumaX]

Microsoft was punished? 😉

 

[XZeroII]

Originally posted by: Viper GTS
Think about this for a minute:

1) MS is not an individual
2) This is an EU court, not a US court

Why would double jeapordy even REMOTELY apply?

Viper GTS

I don't think you read what I said closely. A corporation is considered an individual under law. They may do anything an individual can do, but they play by a few different rules (taxes and such). Next, I was asking about the international thing. Couldn't China sue MS next, then Japan, then Taiwan, then every country where one copy was sold? This would ruin MS. (This was a hypothetical example of what COULD happen).

 

[XZeroII]

Originally posted by: Spudd
Microsoft does business internationally. Hence, they are subject to other countries' laws if they do business there. There is no double jeopardy issue here, as they were tried in the American judicial system. The EU has its own system.

Think about it though, let's say you murder a German while visiting Germany and you get 10 years in prison. After those 10 years, you come back to America and we decide to give you another 10 years. That doesn't seem right to me...

 

[BDawg]

So, if I go kill someone and get acquited, I can kill someone else without worrying about paying for the crime because I can't be tried for murder twice? That's not how it works.

Nowhere does that article suggest that even if it was in the US, that it's the same instances of monopolistic activity.

 

[MacBaine]

Originally posted by: XZeroII

Originally posted by: Spudd
Microsoft does business internationally. Hence, they are subject to other countries' laws if they do business there. There is no double jeopardy issue here, as they were tried in the American judicial system. The EU has its own system.

Think about it though, let's say you murder a German while visiting Germany and you get 10 years in prison. After those 10 years, you come back to America and we decide to give you another 10 years. That doesn't seem right to me...

Comparing apples to oranges. In your example, it's more like they pushed a button that killed a German and an American at the same time, and then after they serve their time in one country, they are wanted in the other.

 

[XZeroII]

Originally posted by: BDawg
So, if I go kill someone and get acquited, I can kill someone else without worrying about paying for the crime because I can't be tried for murder twice? That's not how it works.

Nowhere does that article suggest that even if it was in the US, that it's the same instances of monopolistic activity.

You are correct, but MS is being punished performing the same acts they were punished for performing here. The EU isn't punishing them for a different crime, it's the same one they were punished for here. That's what I am asking about.

 

[Spudd]

EH?? That analogy is flawed. First of all, you'd likely be extradited to America and tried under our laws for murdering the German in the first place. But anyways, you can't compare murder to a monopoly suit. Business is one branch of law, criminal procedure is another. MS is subject to civil suits in every country which it does business with, and it must comply with their court orders, or face being held in contempt of court and an injunction being issued preventing them from doing further business in that country (depends on the system of course, but you get the idea). When they settle in one country's system, if the other pending suits were not joined and agreed to the terms of that courts ruling, then they are free to bring suit in another country.

 

[Spudd]

You are correct that they are likely being sued for the same thing, but as I've said: you do business in a foreign country, you are subject to their laws. Just because you were sued by citizens in one country and settled there, doesn't mean that citizens/entities of another country are precluded from seeking redress in their own court system.

 

[GizmoFreak]

Yes, seems to be a flawed analogy. Double jeopardy is really not applicable here.

 

[XZeroII]

I realize it doesn't apply, but in principle, it should (at least I think so)

 

[Spudd]

But you're missing the principle of access to justice. Think of it this way: I am a businessman who does business in America and Japan. I screw over my customers here in America and in Japan. I settle in America to pay all of my American customers restitution. Why should you, in Japan, be precluded from seeking redress in your courts? Aren't you entitled to justice and having your day in court as well?