zlacker

[return to "X offices raided in France as UK opens fresh investigation into Grok"]
1. stickf+gv1[view] [source] 2026-02-03 18:13:35
>>vikave+(OP)
Honest question: What does it mean to "raid" the offices of a tech company? It's not like they have file cabinets with paper records. Are they just seizing employee workstations?

Seems like you'd want to subpoena source code or gmail history or something like that. Not much interesting in an office these days.

◧◩
2. ronsor+KB1[view] [source] 2026-02-03 18:37:08
>>stickf+gv1
These days many tech company offices have a "panic button" for raids that will erase data. Uber is perhaps the most notorious example.
◧◩◪
3. camina+TI1[view] [source] 2026-02-03 19:04:37
>>ronsor+KB1
>notorious

What happened to due process? Every major firm should have a "dawn raid" policy to comply while preserving rights.

Specific to the Uber case(s), if it were illegal, then why didn't Uber get criminal charges or fines?

At best there's an argument that it was "obstructing justice," but logging people off, encrypting, and deleting local copies isn't necessarily illegal.

◧◩◪◨
4. pyrale+xn2[view] [source] 2026-02-03 22:19:17
>>camina+TI1
> if it were illegal, then why didn't Uber get criminal charges or fines?

They had a sweet deal with Macron. Prosecution became hard to continue once he got involved.

◧◩◪◨⬒
5. camina+0E2[view] [source] 2026-02-03 23:48:57
>>pyrale+xn2
Maybe.

Or they had a weak case. Prosecutors even drop winnable cases because they don't want to lose.

◧◩◪◨⬒⬓
6. pyrale+vq3[view] [source] 2026-02-04 06:20:54
>>camina+0E2
Macron's involvement with Uber is public information at this point.

[1]: https://www.lemonde.fr/pixels/article/2022/07/10/uber-files-...

[2]: https://www.radiofrance.fr/franceinter/le-rapport-d-enquete-...

◧◩◪◨⬒⬓⬔
7. camina+jq5[view] [source] 2026-02-04 18:42:56
>>pyrale+vq3
Thanks for the articles. I'm not disputing that Macron got lobbied for favors.

That said, the articles don't really address the discussion topic whether they committed illegal obstruction DURING raids.

To summarize, I'm separating

(1) Uber's creative operating activities (e.g., UberPop in France)

(2) from anti-raid tactics.

It looks like #1 had some fines (non-material) and arrests of Uber France executives.

However, I don't see a clear case established that Uber committed obstruction in #2. Uber had other raids in Quebec, India, the Netherlands,... with kill switches allegedly deployed 12+ times. I don't think there were ever consequences other than a compliance fine of 750 EUROS to their legal counsel in the Netherlands for "non-compliance with an official order". I doubt that's related to actions the day of the raid, but could be wrong.

[go to top]