Oh god, looking at America's track record with stupid lawsuits chances are she'll win.
you fool, what a missed opportunitydancinginfernal said:
Woman sues "Drive" distributor for not being enough like "Fast and the Furious"
- Thread starter Marter
- Start date
Recommended Videos
Oh so much truth here, about the misleading and the sobbing hysterically.Crenelate said:
Of all the misleading trailers to complain about, surely "Drive" would be low on the list.
Adverts have been misleading for a long, long time.
Film trailers have been disappointing people for as long as there have been film trailers. Reason being is that the highlights of a film tend to be shoved into it and you expect everything to be the same quality.
Really hoping it gets thrown out of court. Literally if possible.
Her lawyer is either related to her, very new, completely untrained, a moron or any combination of the above.
The whole misleading trailer thing MIGHT be a valid(ish) issue, but up and suing isn't the way to win it. Unless you're suing as part of a numerous coalition of annoyed movie-goers.
This is, at the very least, going to get laughed out of court.
The whole misleading trailer thing MIGHT be a valid(ish) issue, but up and suing isn't the way to win it. Unless you're suing as part of a numerous coalition of annoyed movie-goers.
This is, at the very least, going to get laughed out of court.
- Apr 1, 2009
- 15,526
- 4,295
- 118
- Gender
- Whatever, just wash your hands.
Hrmm, this sounds fake to me, it sounds allot like one of those stories you hear when they are trying to pass tort reform. They use stories like this to get people to limit lawsuits on things and that is how it became almost impossible to sue a doctor in tx.
This is nothing new. People have been sueing other people over stupid things since the justice system first appeared. I remember a few years back a guy tried to sue Linx because "using their deodorant did not make all the women around him insanely attracted to him as the ads suggested".
Also, if she actually wins, it will pretty much mean the end to advertising since pretty much all of it relies on deception and misrepresentation. Not to mention, does this mean I can sue people on forums who make intentionally misleading titles to their topics?
Also, if she actually wins, it will pretty much mean the end to advertising since pretty much all of it relies on deception and misrepresentation. Not to mention, does this mean I can sue people on forums who make intentionally misleading titles to their topics?
funnily enough it says 'excluding murders'. So what it's really saying is that in scotland you're three times as likely to be assaulted and live.Nurb said:
America on the other hand has one of the highest murder rates in the industrialised world, unfortunately :/.
I find it surprising that a group normally all in favor of consumer protection against unscrupulous business practices so against this. Misleading advertising is illegal (or at least a cause of action under our civil court system), and rightly so. Corporations should not be able to hoodwink the public into buying products they don't want or need by knowingly publishing false advertising. It's a sister sin to fraud.
Whether this is actually false advertising is up for debate, of course, as is whether the consumer ultimately bears blame in this case because other sources of information are so plentiful and easy to access. But I don't think this is as frivolous as most people are making it out to be. I'm glad that I live in a world where a corporation can't advertise a game as a first-person shooter only to give me a port of Atari's ET.
Whether this is actually false advertising is up for debate, of course, as is whether the consumer ultimately bears blame in this case because other sources of information are so plentiful and easy to access. But I don't think this is as frivolous as most people are making it out to be. I'm glad that I live in a world where a corporation can't advertise a game as a first-person shooter only to give me a port of Atari's ET.
Wha... how the... wait... what?
I mean it's pretty obvious she's just doing it to score some easy money, but still, one would think a person would actually think through the whole thing, before SUING THE SODDING DISTRIBUTOR. Like for instance, analyzing whether or not it'd hold up in court, analyzing their chances of winning and of course whether or not it's completely retarded. I mean seriously... how can one be THIS stupid?
Edit: Oh wait... it says Michigan, which means shes an american. That sort of explains it, while not all americans are stupid, the dumbest people do seem to come from the US, atleast the dumbest people who make it into mass media.
Yeah, I know I'm being mean for no real reason, but seriously, people seemingly sue eachother for anything and everything in the US, and that seems to cultivate stupidity, and the reasons people sue eachother and companies for get dumber and dumber. I sincerely hope we've reached the apex here, 'cause if the reasons keep getting any dumber... I... will... actually, I don't know what. I already have a very low opinion of the intelligence of mankind.
I mean it's pretty obvious she's just doing it to score some easy money, but still, one would think a person would actually think through the whole thing, before SUING THE SODDING DISTRIBUTOR. Like for instance, analyzing whether or not it'd hold up in court, analyzing their chances of winning and of course whether or not it's completely retarded. I mean seriously... how can one be THIS stupid?
Edit: Oh wait... it says Michigan, which means shes an american. That sort of explains it, while not all americans are stupid, the dumbest people do seem to come from the US, atleast the dumbest people who make it into mass media.
Yeah, I know I'm being mean for no real reason, but seriously, people seemingly sue eachother for anything and everything in the US, and that seems to cultivate stupidity, and the reasons people sue eachother and companies for get dumber and dumber. I sincerely hope we've reached the apex here, 'cause if the reasons keep getting any dumber... I... will... actually, I don't know what. I already have a very low opinion of the intelligence of mankind.
While the US is generally The Home of the Frivolous Lawsuit (TM), people in other countries have taken the idea and run with it. Working as a Liability claims specialist, I have come across some doozies, such as a woman demanding $10,000 in compensation because she was standing in front of a fire exit and was knocked down by someone opening the door from inside the building.Cenequus said:
I also put together this image for fun after a particularly ludicrous slip and fall issue:
I live in Australia, by the way.
I say sue Fast & the Furious for not being like Drive... A great movie!
Saying "It's like F&F or gone in 60 seconds" means crime drama with car action and not . If it stated 'like the notebook' or 'like star trek' then give her a refund.
Now the lawyer is only there for the class-action and the third to half of all those refunds.
It'll likely be tossed.
Saying "It's like F&F or gone in 60 seconds" means crime drama with car action and not . If it stated 'like the notebook' or 'like star trek' then give her a refund.
Now the lawyer is only there for the class-action and the third to half of all those refunds.
It'll likely be tossed.
