Wishing To Live In A Slightly Better World

curious

what you are forgetting is the power of the media, no company wants to have bad press voluntarily. in today's world, if a company makes a lot of mistakes, it becomes public knowledge immediately, so every company will try to prevent that on its own initiative.

Angelina
And often companies do not care. Want a real life example?
Volkswagen and the diesel issues.
In the US, customers have the tool of class actions against a company and because punitive damages can be extremely high and jury outcomes are unpredictable, VW decided to offer to take back all affected cars or provide high compensation payments to Us customers to set off the reduced value of the cars.
In Germany, customers who were in the exact same situation of facing large devaluations of pretty new cars only got a fraction of what customers in the US got. Simply because the company did not fear separate legal claims, knowing only too well that not many people would be able to drive these cases all the way through the legal system.
Media attention is nice, but it still does not create a level field between big corporations and individual customers. And it is not unheard-of, that media outlets did not report on a story because a big company was actually a good client buying a lot of advertising space.

curious And it is not unheard-of, that media outlets did not report on a story because a big company was actually a good client buying a lot of advertising space.

but you can also see it the other way around. which media group would like to work with companies that are viewed badly by the public? this would also ruin the media group's reputation. In addition, everyone can still sue, there are contracts that both sides have to abide by. If one side doesn't do that, the other side can always assert claims in court, that's what courts are for

Angelina
Did you actually ever look at how much it costs to sue someone? There are a lot of legal tricks you can use.
For example: If I am dissatisfied with a product and publicly say, it is crap, the company can sue me for hurting their business. Yes, I do have a right to free speech, but in Germany for example it is well known that if such a case is brought at the Amtsgericht Hamburg, the judges there are very much leaning towards protecting companies. So you have so first take the loss in a lower court and the legal fees of several thousand Euros. Only then you can take the case to the next level, which - as is well known, you can even google this - again is leaning towards protecting the company. So you need to pay another round of legal fees and only then you can take this case to the BGH where finally you get your right of free speech and win against the company. But unless you are able to fund ten to twenty thousand Euros upfront in the hope of getting everything back when you finally do win, you better do not start that fight.
For big corporations of course, a few tenthousand Euros in legal fees is nothing and actually dirt cheap to counter public negative speech.
In the US such cases are called slap suites, I don't know if there is actually a term in German for this.
But that example should make it clear, that having a legal right and actually getting that right in reality are two very different things and if the playing ground is not level, the big corporations usually win.

curious

so if you go to the media with a factual report that you can also prove, no company can sue you for defamation of character or the like, and in germany anyone can apply for help with legal costs. if you win in court, it won't cost you anything for a start.

Angelina
Not true unfortunately and it is 7nderstandable, because you simply cannot have the experience how things work out in real life at your age.

You can apply for what is called 'Prozesskostenhilfe'. But with every legal case there is a risk you don't win that case, and be it for whatever technicality. You only get the financial support if your income is under a certain limit. The problem is, that even if you earn well above the average paying 10 or 20 thousand in legal fees is a huge amount you risk and in case you earn enough or have savings, you do not receive that support.
Let's say you buy a car for 40k and there is the company that cheated with diesel emissions. Now due to that cheating, the car has lost 20k in value and you want to sue the company for your loss.
So you risk maybe 5 to 10k in order to hopefully get your 20k back. But there is no certainty you win.
So you think twice if you really want to invest the 10k in the hope of winning. But when 10k is a quarter of your annual income (average annual income in Germany is 40 something thousand), maybe putting a quarter of that at risk is too dangerous, so you cut your losses, and grudgingly accept that it is better not to sue.
For big corporations on the other hand, legal fees are not an issue, because they anyhow have a legal department with in house lawyers and the fees are absolutely neglectable to those companies.

Angelina

Angelina no company can sue you for defamation of character or the like

Of course they can. That is how the game is played. As a big company you know you will most likely not win in the end. But still they can (and often do) sue just to wear the other side out, both financially and emotionally.
For you a lot depends on the outcome, because you have to invest a lot of money to fight off that case and constantly find time to consult with your lawyer etc. For the big company, the legal department handles things and the money that is at risk if they loose is negligible. That's exactly why they do it and why many ordinary people give up eventually and do not go all the way through the court levels.

This is other level of absurdity and violence.

curious

Ithink it is important that you first look for a consultation with a good lawyer. initial talks are usually not very expensive, a good lawyer will also tell you whether it is worth conducting a lawsuit and what the chances of a win are

curious

but often it is enough to make enough pressure. a big company will not like to go to court if the chances are low, usually other offers are made etc.

Angelina
I suggest you watch 'The Rainmaker' (Der Regenmacher), a movie from 1997 after the book from John Grisham. If is of course a more dramatic setting in order to make it worthwhile reading for entertainment, but you get a pretty good understanding how big corporations use their size and power to exploit ordinary people.
And although the case is obviously extreme, the underlying concept how to win not by having the better legal position but by 3xploiting the system is valid and can - with necessary variations - be adjusted to work in pretty much every legal system in this world in some way or another.

Angelina He hate any idea of freedom. They are lostes words from your side.

Kaja This is other level of absurdity and violence.
Kaja He hate any idea of freedom. They are lostes words from your side

Just in terms of lawsuits and the use of actual advantage by large companies, @curious is unfortunately right and I would not perceive what he writes as an attack on freedom, but a sad statement of facts.

Well, @curious , I understood her words as a criticism towards the situation, not as an attack (in this case).
However, @Kaja , please , you can keep writing your ideas here, but watch your tone.
Currently I the forum do not exist anyone defending or telling abusive stories, so bad words only create bad environment.
People comes here to have a nice time, and tension avoids it.
In the future, we will be rigorous with this, because it is a way of sabotaging the forum.

audioguy58 From sad personal experience (nothing to do with chastity belts), if you are from a somewhat better economic background, the "Children and Youth Services" will leave you alone, even if you beg them for help, actually have doctor's letters asking them to supply certain services.

What you get is two ladies visiting, checking the condo, nice and clean, the fridge is stocked well with good food, kid does not complain about abuse. Bye bye, no social worker to support the family regularly as suggested by the children psychiatrist and requested by the parents.

Nope the "children protection services" are targeted to certain social classes, and the upper-middle classes aren't their hunting grounds. Even if related professionals think that their services would be helpful.