The $50 million punishment feels so insubstantial to Microsoft that they probably wouldn't even think twice before doing similar things again or worse. Only things that could threaten the bottom line would actually make companies reconsider.
The $50 million punishment feels so insubstantial to Microsoft that they probably wouldn't even think twice before doing similar things again or worse. Only things that could threaten the bottom line would actually make companies reconsider.
> The $50 million punishment feels so insubstantial
It's potentially quite a bit more. TFA mentions another two penalties: "three times the total benefits that have been obtained and are reasonably attributable" (~2.5 million customers times $40+ for the difference in subscrptions times three is $300 million), or "30 per cent of the corporation’s adjusted turnover during the breach turnover period" if the preceding can't be reasonably calculated (I'm not going to dig through Microsoft's financial statements, but it's probably substantial.) The greatest of three is taken.
If you still think it's pocket change, the point of fines is not to bankrupt the company, but to lead them to less shitty behavior by disincentivizing the alternative. It takes a persistent effort and time.
ah shoot wait i just realized "take the greatest" goes in the other direction. doh
No expert, but these fines are usually exponential. Usually they start with a slap on the wrist of $100,000s, then climb to the millions.
That the opening figure is so high it's clear that if MS ever do it again the fine will be in the billions.
So you might even say it's actually a moderately strong statement by the Australian government that they're not playing around.