Bane Mask (thelemmy.club)
submitted 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago) by to c/linkedinlunatics@sh.itjust.works
 
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] 5 points 1 month ago (3 children)

It's not actually law and that's just what companies want to be the belief for them behaving reprehensibly

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 3 points 1 month ago (1 child)
  • [–] 1 point 1 month ago

    Yes, I believe you're interpreting that page incorrectly. Fiduciary duties are law bindings for specific relationships and situations not applicable for all publicly traded companies to all shareholders.

    I believe you're confusing that idea with the theory of shareholder supremacy that's a claim, popularized by the likes of Jack Welch to support their actions.

    The background comes from Dodge v. Ford Motor Co. in 1919 which stated

    There should be no confusion... A business corporation is organized and carried on primarily for the profit of the stockholders.

    and the interpretation has been quite debated.

  • source
  • parent