Clarification on a few points

Posted Feb 1, 2012 12:22 UTC (Wed) by niner (guest, #26151)
In reply to: Clarification on a few points by anselm
Parent article: Garrett: The ongoing fight against GPL enforcement

All these so different Sony companies belong to Sony Corporation. They answer to the same board. The ones you mentioned share a common root even on a lower level at Sony Corporation of America.

It's like "let's put all our questionable businesses into a separate corporation, so we share all the income but not the blame".

Sorry, I just don't buy your argument. It's a Sony.

to post comments

Clarification on a few points

Posted Feb 1, 2012 12:49 UTC (Wed) by anselm (subscriber, #2796) [Link] (1 responses)

Right. So having a brother who's a sleazy lawyer automatically makes you sleazy, too.

Incidentally, Sony BMG, of the 2005 rootkit scandal, wasn't even a 100% Sony subsidiary – it was a joint company, half of which consisted of Bertelsmann Music Group (hence the »BMG«), a subsidiary of Bertelsmann AG. Sony bought Bertelsmann's share in the venture only in 2008, to (re-)make Sony Music Entertainment.

Clarification on a few points

Posted Feb 1, 2012 13:04 UTC (Wed) by ekj (guest, #1524) [Link]

Not unless you and your brother both stand under the direct command of the same entity. But if you do, then totally yes.

If Sleazy Inc owns companies A and B, then yes, A doing something evil does reflect poorly on B, and it makes total sense to (for example) consider B without moral standing, based on the actions of A.

It makes sense because the same single board controls both A and B.

If your left hand engages in aggression towards me, I'm totally going to consider your right hand a potential threat: because I'm aware that both of your arms are controlled by the same entity.