• General

  • Wishing To Live In A Slightly Better World

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.

                        Kaja This is other level of absurdity and violence.

                        Welcome to reality.

                          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.

                                    Kaja
                                    Again you are Insulting because you claim things about me which are completely untrue and for your statement you have zero proof.
                                    You are obviously lacking sophistication, show a blatant lack of basic decency when it comes to discuss a topic with people who are of opposing opinion to a point where you always attack people on a personal level rather than engage with the actual argument.
                                    I tried to offer you a well meant advise you could have benefited from and instead of considering it, and tried to learn something, you flatly rejected everything.
                                    Now I am really tired of your constant personal attacks on me and your insults and hereby ask @Ines to take a decisive action against your behaviour. Obviously editing your posts does not work as a warning so more is needed from the Admin.

                                      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.

                                      • Owl likes this.

                                          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.

                                              Ines Well, @curious , I understood her words as a criticism towards the situation, not as an attack (in this case).

                                              Well, stating that I am against any form of freedom is obviously an attack against my person and not a contribution to the discussion I have with @Angelina. She did not engage in any argument but simply attacked me out of context and actually trying to isolate me and destroy any form of meaningful discussion by implying that "does not make sense to talk to me because I am anyhow against every form of freedom" - which of course is not true.

                                              • Kaja replied to this.

                                                  curious Im tired by you. All the time the same. Sorry.

                                                  For me it has not purpose discuss with you. It has no consequence.

                                                  You all the time say only that you are insulted. Boring.

                                                  • Ines replied to this.

                                                      Everyone would have an internet birth certificate, which would contain your DNA profile and a link to your current biometrics.

                                                        Kaja For me it has not purpose discuss with you

                                                        There are people with whom we can't argue, they just do not connect.
                                                        The best thing to do @Kaja is to stop trying and just ignore those people.
                                                        I have done it myself in this photo and they have done it with me.
                                                        I think everyone can tell which users I ca not stand and which ones can not stand me, and we have never had a bad word.

                                                          curious

                                                          yes, so sorry, that's the same thing many on the left tell me and they keep forgetting the power of the media. i can destroy a company in 3 twitter posts today, so every company will be careful and try to do the best for the customer. Public relations has become too important in modern times for companies.
                                                          maybe the left is right and i live in a neoliberal world of make-believe, but i still have the idea that companies work for the people because they ensure the companies' profits and not against the people.

                                                          audioguy58 Everyone would have an internet birth certificate, which would contain your DNA profile and a link to your current biometrics.

                                                          @Kaja before you say something against @curious, that's anti-liberal 😉

                                                                Angelina i still have the idea that companies work for the people because they ensure the companies' profits and not against the people.

                                                                For small and maybe even mid sized companies there is some truth to that. But for the big globally acting corporations, rules are different. If even the diesel scandal was unable to destroy VW, the idea that a few negative twitter posts could is an illusion. Look at how VW took advantage of German buyers who unfortunate did not have the legal tool of class action available to them compared to US customers.
                                                                VW was scared of a trial in the US courts where a punitive damage based on the proven intend to cheat would most likely have been in the billion dollar range. So VW settled the case, taking back all affected cars from US customers or paying for the reduced value.
                                                                German customers got nothing comparable, because German law does not know class action and VW was not afraid of individual legal cases from Germany, where no punitive damages loomed and even if losing, VW would have to pay a few thousand Euros Max for the I dividual car's reduced value.
                                                                If there are now regulations to reign in internationally operating corporations, we the people wil, always be disadvantaged. These corporations can shift around money from one country to another with legal tricks and evade not only taxation but also accountability for what they do to a large extend.
                                                                I am all in favour for a free market, but it will only stay free and fair if seller and buyer are at least roughly facing each other on equal terms.

                                                                Want another example? Terms and Conditions of big companies are many pages long, written by in-house lawyers to make sure there is as little legal accountability for the company as possible. Have you actually spend an hour or two reading through all that stuff before you bought your last car or signed up for your mobile phone contract?
                                                                Of course not, no sane person has the time and frequently neither the legal knowledge to comprehend everything written there. But by not doing that, you are already at a huge disadvantage. A little less so in Germany where the law states that 'surprising clauses in T&C are not legal, but if that law did not exist, good night to your rights as customer.