This week things got pretty heavy so this batch is all about law and politics. But, hey, it’s 2020. It weighs what it weighs.
Thompson’s overview of how the concept of monopoly has captured minds and imagination alike in the USA since their inception is quite interesting, but also a great reminder of the different legal dynamics of common law compared offshoots of Roman law. It’s something to keep in mind as Epic v. Apple and Epic v. Google play out in the US as outcomes there won’t necessarily be emulated in Europe or elsewhere.
I’m not on Oracle’s side on this one, especially when the main argument is that APIs should be protected. But as I kept reading I felt a creeping fear of how Google’s counsel’s apparent failure to provide a succinct counterargument could to lead an outcome with practical repercussions for the global software market. That national legal systems can have so far reaching an effect is a phenomenon I understand while I find potentially terrifying.
Speaking of legal systems, national law and global repercussions… Yep. China. We’re at a point where one company or other will even go against international law precedent to appease one market, while corporations’ drive to keep costs down means it’s now more practical to produce one version of a product for all market than afford special considerations only when and where needed. We can disagree with Chinese law all we want but it’s not up to us to change Chinese law. It is up to push back when Chinese law overrides our own, whichever that is.
Three medical providers who worked for Advanced told me that clinic directors instructed them to avoid giving any treatment to Amazon workers that would make their injuries recordable. Normally, these providers could prescribe medications, days of rest, physical therapy or workplace restrictions, such as guidance to avoid climbing stairs or lifting anything above a certain weight. But clinic directors pressured medical staff to send injured Amazon employees back to work without any of those remedies, said the providers, who asked that their names not be used for fear of harming their careers.
A nurse practitioner who worked at the clinic said she dreaded seeing Amazon patients because she didn’t think she would be able to treat them appropriately. She said she remembers an Amazon worker who came to the clinic in a lot of pain from a wrist injury, crying and asking, “Can’t you do something?”
“I’m really sorry,” the nurse practitioner recalled telling her. “There’s really not a whole lot I can offer you right now.”
In a July 2019 email, Parsons instructed medical staff to contact her or the clinic owner before they “think about giving restrictions or making it recordable” for Amazon patients.
There’s a lot to be shocked by in Reveal’s article but those four paragraphs alone could (and should) get pretty much anyone fired up.