|
What arguements? The only things you have said is: "I don't think interference is justified" and you said no company should have to have a rule that says you can't fire someone for no good reason.
The first in unsupportable. The second is.... questionable, since I was trying to compare the kind of power and influence held by companies with governments, which unless you are appointed like a presidential cabinet member, requires a trial of some sort to determine if what was done was actually inappropriate. All I am saying is that companies have no internal checks and balances, not that some of the more idiotic ones imposed from the outside are not questionable.
As for real issue I would like to see fixed, lets start with patents... They where originally come up with as a way to protect small companies from losing profit off and idea, due to someone else stealing it. Now you can patent stuff without even having a product that works or even anything remotely tangible. All you need is an idea and a lawyer that can make it sound convincingly limited enough that it isn't immediately obvious how many people are probably going to get sued for accidentally infringing (or just never go into business for fear of having it happen). It has become a tool for big companies to shove everyone else out of the way instead.
If you mean we don't need more laws then I maybe agree, but we need to repair the mess we do have, without shooting ourselves in the foot in the process. Right now if you are big enough, you can operate with almost total impunity in the business world, even when you do infringe on everyone else, because all you have to do is agree to pay out a bunch of pocket change (and do it in a way that gives you free advertising), not actually stop doing whatever you got sued for.
|