• JackGreenEarth@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    13
    ·
    9 months ago

    Ok, so Apple doesn’t owe them because they were getting cobalt from the global supply chain. But those children definitely deserve compensation, I suppose from the mine owners.

    • pelespirit@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      18
      ·
      9 months ago

      “Purchasing an unspecified amount of cobalt through the global supply chain is not ‘participation in a venture’ within the meaning of the TVPRA [Trafficking Victims Protection Reauthorization Act of 2008],” the ruling said.

      Nah, those companies knew and deliberately tried to hide that they knew. The global supply chain is a cover your ass way of saying it. Just like with coffee, cocoa and other fair trade items, they could set up a system to cover it. They certainly have enough money to do that.

      • DessalinesA
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        8
        ·
        9 months ago

        John Smith - Imperialism in the 21st century is an excellent book on this, but this article on the GDP illusion, mainly about three global commodities, the smartphone, t-shirt, and, coffee, is a great introduction.

        • pelespirit@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          edit-2
          9 months ago

          I don’t care if they make a profit from the work? They are using these products in their products, they have an ethical responsibility to choose companies that treat their employees well or find another company to purchase from. Companies that make that much money from companies that use slave labor should be not normal or accepted. The end.

          Apple does not own the Chinese, Malaysian, and other production facilities that manufacture and assemble its products. In contrast to the in-house, foreign direct-investment relationship that used to typify transnational corporations, no annual flow of repatriated profits is generated by Apple’s “arm’s length” suppliers. Standard interpretation of economic statistics, all of which record the results of transactions in the market place, assumes that the slice of the iPhone’s final selling price captured by each U.S. or Chinese firm is identical to the value added each supposedly contributed. They reveal no sign of any cross-border profit flows or value transfers affecting the distribution of profits to Apple and its various suppliers. The only part of Apple’s profits that appear to originate in China are those resulting from the sale of its products in that country.

    • Rascabin
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      13
      ·
      9 months ago

      It’s messed up how the court and companies benefiting from this basically said, " oh shucks, you guys sued the wrong people. Try again."