From a tech perspective, I do find myself occasionally having interesting discussions with co-founders about what it means to be operating our business in a legal environment where the rule of law is diminished. Startups have often had to contend with variance in enforcement and interpretation.
Some of my favorite historical examples of startups who had to worry about uncertain rule of law are:
- Aereo[0]: Who tried their very best to follow the law diligently but got slapped down anyways.
- Uber[1]: Who blatantly broke the law so callously that they relied on gaps in the rule of law to enable their business model.
- Kim Dotcom[2]: A German-born citizen who had never set foot inside USA's jurisdiction found himself arrested by the FBI in helicopters storming his home in New Zealand. This emphasized that any founder needs to follow US law, no matter where they are operating.
In each case, it seemed that whoever had more money tended to win, rather than who had the letter of the law on their side.