Hacker News Reader

> it is deserving of the same attitude you'd have towards a street gang running a protection racket

The difference is that their actions here seem within the law? The law allowed them to drag out the process for so long. I wouldn't blame them for doing so.

My argument is that the legislation/regulatory environment is to blame. There should be laws/regulation on the books to discourage/punish/recoup costs of behavior we consider unacceptable.

View on HN

>The difference is that their actions here seem within the law? The law allowed them to drag out the process for so long. I wouldn't blame them for doing so.

There absolutely should be reforms to the system to make this impossible, yes. In the meantime, we can discourage this by making them wear it. The decisions Airbnb made as an organization, have shown us all something about the company and the people in charge of it.

If we can't sanction them legally, we at least can sanction their reputation.

Especially in Italy, the law often allows you to drag criminal trials so long that you might get scot-free because of the statute of limitations. The process should definitely be blamed for making trials so long, but that certainly that doesn't absolve the criminals.

I have never seen a statute of limitations that can expire if charges have already been initiated.

That's Italy for you!

Reply on news.ycombinator.com