Odd to me that for companies like Google the state doesn't believe they can get what they need from simple subpoenas, but rather feel they need to forcibly seize records in person.
You can destroy things fairly quickly. The Stasi destroyed more than a million records in less than a night. And in 2024 it takes a button click. https://www.stasi-unterlagen-archiv.de/en/archives/the-recon...
1) steal legitimate and legal intellectual property
2) while they perform the raid, they search for other reasons to find them guilty of something
3) make good companies look bad to the public
4) it's not that unusual for them to accidentally destroy or cause damage to property while they perform the raid
5) maintain oppression that they might at anytime be raided for anything
Criminal versus civil. This sounds like sanctions suspicions.
Is it because Google's mantra is "Don't be evil", therefore they will be truthful with their records and companies not employing such a mantra might destroy evindence therefore can to be raided?
Uber implemented a kill switch to prevent government law enforcement from accessing (potentially) incriminating or sensitive information during onsite investigations. When activated, the kill switch would effectively cut off access to Uber's data for the location being raided.
Expecting companies to fully cooperate with state agencies might not always be realistic... I understand why authorities might prefer to directly seize materials or data. It eliminates any potential delay or non-compliance: they basically cut the bullshit.
Would they do it as soon as polite dudes in suits walk in? Would chaos ensue if the switch were pulled in a false alarm? If not, then it's "reversible" and an employee could be coerced into flipping it back, right?
https://civilprocedure.uslegal.com/discovery/spoliation-of-e...
France authorities also recently ransacked Nvidias office in France: https://www.reuters.com/technology/nvidias-french-offices-ra...
More and more is it so, that European governments see successful companies as a threat to their power and control.
Politicians on the other hand, like Mr. Trump, are usually born-rich buffoons who do anything to win, and after they win, many of them exercise their power with intolerance and arrogance. Politicians climb the ranks using their money and power, not by developing technical skills, or learning important crafts.
The Great Man theory is trumped by the "Went to the right schools and my parents have connections" theory. For both C-suite and politicians.
In the face of politicians vs C-suite business men, you know, it's the politicians that have the authority and power, and they are at the crux to yield it responsibly. C-suite business men are like ants to the politicians - powerless in comparison with the powers of the lawmakers.
As a result, it's not so much of C-suite business men being just, as it's about politicians being unjust.
At least in our neoliberal system all these assholes are counter-powers to each other. Too bad for the environment, though.
> These C-suite successful companies were at least built and designed by successful people, who succeeded by being moral human beings at least more moral
Ah yes, the famous morality of big tobacco, as well as big oil, big pharma, big agrochemestry and now big tech.
Big anything?
Usually these discussions get end with everything being miraculously cured if we all go libertarian.
Well, going more libertarian would be a great start.
This is the kind of things police will do if they have a warrant (or the local equivalent) in any sane democracy. Democracy does not mean that we have to let companies get away with crime or nicely tell them before a search so they can destroy evidence.
> ransacked
Search, that’s the word you’re looking for.
> More and more is it so, that European governments see successful companies as a threat to their power and control.
How’s the US government handling Huawei again? Did the Atlantic Ocean close overnight?
Also, what makes you think that police investigations are more common than they used to be?
There is not a single sentence that makes sense in your post.
Democracy also doesn't mean that the authorities should ransack successful companies on a mere whim. Democracy also doesn't mean that the states and government should exercise their power limitlessly, nor turn their power into oppressing the people.
> How’s the US government handling Huawei again? Did the Atlantic Ocean close overnight?
This isn't about Huawei. The OP above me wrote about Google, and I included Nividia.
> Also, what makes you think that police investigations are more common than they used to be?
Obviously, this isn't something I'm going to be able to prove. Not all my arguments need to be backed by some sort of a sourceable evidence. If you don't want to believe this part of my statement, then don't, it's up to the reader to form their own opinion - that by no means discredits my post, since I'm obviously giving my opinion and you don't have to agree.
> Search, that’s the word you’re looking for.
Ransacked: search through (a place or receptacle) to find something, especially in such a way as to cause disorder and damage.
^ Yup, that's the one.
Furthermore, the European elite hate the successful american companies with a passion, and they purposely undermine them to help their own companies instead.
There have been plenty of scandals where the US has engineered spying to help US companies [1]. Corruption is corruption except when it’s international and in your own nations interest.
[1] https://www.nytimes.com/2014/05/21/business/us-snooping-on-c...