[Bob Tanner]

Originally Posted by thunderfoot

This is a bunch of horse puckey. On the back of the ticket you buy, look at the little writing. Self explanatory. Case closed.

Now THAT is some logic which I can admire!

[LSC9901]

Originally Posted by Bob Tanner

Now THAT is some logic which I can admire!

Now would that be horse puckey or the info on the back of the ticket ??? Welcome home Bob.

[Bob Tanner]

Originally Posted by LSC9901

Now would that be horse puckey or the info on the back of the ticket ??? Welcome home Bob.

Thanks. My semi-retired job asked for a favor. She Who Must Be Obeyed is visiting our son in JAX and I spent the last couple of days in PIttsburgh.

In the illustrious words of W.C. Fields (for you kids who don't recognize his name, he's on Wikopedia.com), "I'd rather be in Philadelphia!" (No I wouldn't! I'd rather be where it's warm!)

I digress... I was referring to the simple act of reading the disclaimer on the back of the ticket, then abiding by it.

I repeat my thread title: Yet another case for executing trial lawyers.

[Quality88]

Originally Posted by Bob Tanner

Thanks. My semi-retired job asked for a favor. She Who Must Be Obeyed is visiting our son in JAX and I spent the last couple of days in PIttsburgh.

In the illustrious words of W.C. Fields (for you kids who don't recognize his name, he's on Wikopedia.com), "I'd rather be in Philadelphia!" (No I wouldn't! I'd rather be where it's warm!)

I digress... I was referring to the simple act of reading the disclaimer on the back of the ticket, then abiding by it.

I repeat my thread title: Yet another case for executing trial lawyers.

Agreed with the title of the thread... I think Thunderfoot is right... best I remember on the back of my ticket from DEGA was some disclaimer on the ticket. If Chicagoland shows one of it's tickets then the Daddy shouldn't get a dime for his son's suffering. I stress shouldn't. I mean afterall... we do have judges smart enough to give someone money for puttin a cup of hot coffee between their legs

[Bob Tanner]

Originally Posted by Quality88

Agreed with the title of the thread... I think Thunderfoot is right...I mean afterall... we do have judges smart enough to give someone money for puttin a cup of hot coffee between their legs

How about a legal system which takes, by force, land legally owned by an individual and GIVES it to a private developer?

OK, before you think I'm going waaaay off topic here, to quote the arti9cle posted by simple simon:

Did you know that International Speedway Corp. (ISC, a.k.a.NA$CAR) got the land on which they built Kansas Speedway in exactly this way? See below link:

Supreme Court backs eminent domain*-*Nation/Politics*-*The Washington Times, America's Newspaper

lawyers and judges...grrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrr!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!

[Quality88]

Originally Posted by Bob Tanner

Did you know that International Speedway Corp. (ISC, a.k.a.NA$CAR) got the land on which they built Kansas Speedway in exactly this way?

Why does this not suprise me

[BringBackWilkesboro]

Originally Posted by thunderfoot

This is a bunch of horse puckey. On the back of the ticket you buy, look at the little writing. Self explanatory. Case closed.

I guess I'll throw a couple pennies in. Thunderfoot is right. You bought the ticket, you went to the track, you were liable to end up in some sort of media. He could have just as easily wound up on camera during a TV shot of the crowd. Do you expect the media to stop all 100 something thousand people at the gate and ask if they want their face blurred out should they end up on camera?

Has everyone forgotten about civil rights here???
Also, the kid was probably embarrassed because he had a bunch drunks coming up to him and scaring the kid for life.
I have children and I can fully understand the fathers point of view. The dollar signs are secondary here, and the boys right to being published in a guide should be released before he is pictured.
And as far as the money goes, the photograper im sure was paid for the photo...without anyones release, what gives him the right to capitalize on a cute kids image and from what I have seen of this picture....the boy is clearly recognizable.
Hey Dad.......I hope you set a standard and go for millions....because you and your son were exploited without your knowledge.

In court, this would win hands down if a jury gets a hold of this.

[jks812]

I also have children. But if I take them to a place where cameras are going like crazy and television cameras are all over the place, I would have to assume that there is a chance someone would get a picture of my kid. Now if I don't want to take that chance, then I don't take the kid there. I don't see where this has anything to do with civil rights. This is the reason the courts are so clogged up with stupid cases. Another thing I can't stand, is someone who uses their kids to get money and to me thats all this dad is doing.

[Bob Tanner]

Originally Posted by privacy advocate

Has everyone forgotten about civil rights here???
Also, the kid was probably embarrassed because he had a bunch drunks coming up to him and scaring the kid for life.
I have children and I can fully understand the fathers point of view. The dollar signs are secondary here, and the boys right to being published in a guide should be released before he is pictured.
And as far as the money goes, the photograper im sure was paid for the photo...without anyones release, what gives him the right to capitalize on a cute kids image and from what I have seen of this picture....the boy is clearly recognizable.
Hey Dad.......I hope you set a standard and go for millions....because you and your son were exploited without your knowledge.

In court, this would win hands down if a jury gets a hold of this.

The operand phrase here is "Civil Rights?" These are the same rights that august group, the ACLU, champions?

I can see the ACLU taking to court a case mandating a five day "cooling off" period on the purchase of all forms of devices which can record one's image. Heaven forbid someone get his picture taken exploiting this image, thus offending the injured party! Maybe the trial lawyers could get legislation passed making "Camera Safety" classes mandatory? They might even aspire to making any form of exploitation a capital offense?

Thanks, but no thanks. I stand by my original opinion of the matter. It's yet another case of our litigant society gone bonkers, with some dad who didn't hit the lottery using his kid as a a substitute. A frivolous lawsuit enriching the pockets of trial lawyers, who are a black eye on the face of the human race.

[LSC9901]

Originally Posted by privacy advocate

Has everyone forgotten about civil rights here???
Also, the kid was probably embarrassed because he had a bunch drunks coming up to him and scaring the kid for life.
I have children and I can fully understand the fathers point of view. The dollar signs are secondary here, and the boys right to being published in a guide should be released before he is pictured.
And as far as the money goes, the photograper im sure was paid for the photo...without anyones release, what gives him the right to capitalize on a cute kids image and from what I have seen of this picture....the boy is clearly recognizable.
Hey Dad.......I hope you set a standard and go for millions....because you and your son were exploited without your knowledge.

In court, this would win hands down if a jury gets a hold of this.

Really now. Which is it ??? In my court this case would stand little if any chance.

[Bob Tanner]

Originally Posted by LSC9901

Really now. Which is it ??? In my court this case would stand little if any chance.

Sounds like your basic ACLU type to me, Steve. You know.. EVERYONE is a victim to one degree or another. The kind of person who feels that there should be a law to prevent being offended by anything or anybody.

It really amazes me that anyone would have any presumption of privacy when in a public place? In your own home...you bet. In a public restroom... of course. In your private automobile... no question. But sitting in the grandstands at a sporting event???

This presumption of privacy holds as much aqua as the schmuck who loudly carries on a conversation on his cell phone in a restaurant, then gets P.O.'s when someone remarks to him about a facet of his conversation.

[Racer Duck]

Hopefully it'll go to court .. with a jury .. made up of ardent sport fans .. who will find for the plaintif .. to be paid in season tickets for himself and any other human being NOT a minor and a 1 year scholarship to NASCAR U. for the boy and an autographed helmet of his favorite driver .. the tickets to be on the top row of the most remote section of the stands ... behind a pole. Bet the boy's embarasment would be over .. the dad's just starting.

[clutch]

Originally Posted by Racer Duck

Hopefully it'll go to court .. with a jury .. made up of ardent sport fans .. who will find for the plaintif .. to be paid in season tickets for himself and any other human being NOT a minor and a 1 year scholarship to NASCAR U. for the boy and an autographed helmet of his favorite driver .. the tickets to be on the top row of the most remote section of the stands ... behind a pole. Bet the boy's embarasment would be over .. the dad's just starting.

I like your style there Racer D

I was just looking on the back of my feb 2006 Auto Club 500 ticket and it says..."Holder grants permission to the California Speedway Corporation and its agents to use holders image/and or likeness in connection with any still photograph, live or recorded video display, or other transmission reproduction whole or in part, of the event"

[Bob Tanner]

Originally Posted by clutch

I like your style there Racer D

I was just looking on the back of my feb 2006 Auto Club 500 ticket and it says..."Holder grants permission to the California Speedway Corporation and its agents to use holders image/and or likeness in connection with any still photograph, live or recorded video display, or other transmission reproduction whole or in part, of the event"

You actually want some poor slump to take responsibility for his actions and read the fine print? Back here, on this side of the globe, there is an entire class of people who honestly believe that the government and the legal system can be the answer to all of their poor decisions and whimsical behaviour.

To paraphrase another sage, seen here recently:

"But WHAT ABOUT THE POOR TYKE'S CIVIL RIGHTS???!!!"

To further paraphrase Tony Soprano, " I've got yer civil rights, right here!"

I remain firm in my belief that there should be some sort of open season on trial lawyers.