[haswell]

> The legal definition of bribery though is

This might sound pedantic, but this might be better framed as: The form of bribery that is illegal is the kind that involves offering, giving, soliciting…an individual holding a public or legal duty.

Bribery as a concept stands on its own, outside of the legal system. The legal system defines what forms of bribery will get you in legal trouble, but does not have a monopoly on bribery itself.

To your point, that means there are forms of bribery that may be technically legal.

[Macha]

Yes, the difference between illegal and immoral is one I've myself tried to explain to HN people often enough (though more usually in the context of people trying to argue "It's not illegal, why are you complaining about it", when a company does something immoral). That is why I had the final paragraph:

> So immoral, and stuff many companies and institutions consequently have policies against, but doesn't seem illegal.

[kmeisthax]

If you ask SCOTUS, some forms of bribery are actually constitutionally protected free speech!

[janalsncm]

If you asked SCOTUS, some of them might have to recuse themselves.