I trust they are banning absolutely anything to do with IBM in California as well?
OK, so how about this scenario: A company owned and operated by Bad Guys does Bad Things during the war, and as part of the punitive/reparations process, the Good Guys who beat the Bad Guys confiscate the company and take control of it themselves. Should the new owners be punished, effectively, for defeating the original evil owners?
So when we are going to start suing all the companies who enabled the Stalinist massacres? We could start with any firm that ever had any connection with Armand Hammer.
For that matter, when are the Western intelligentsia who helped Stalin to get away with murdering tens of millions of people going to be held to account for their participation in his crimes? New York Times, I’m lookin’ at you.
Why shouldn’t it work that way, though? Legal fictions aside, a corporation isn’t a person, it’s a possession. Presuming we punished the actual people responsible for the crimes, why shouldn’t someone else be able to make use of their possessions? What’s the alternative? Dynamite all the factories and office buildings these companies used, and wait for someone else to come in and rebuild all of that infrastructure? Where’s the sense in that?
If Hans abetted the Holocaust, putting him in jail and taking away his worldly possessions is the deterrent. Punishing Fritz fifty years later because he bought something Hans used to own doesn’t deter anyone from anything.
Say what you want. I’m not giving up P.G. Wodehouse.