Real offer? or Rick S. just blowing smoke? Where is Rick S.

[sixpack]

Nope, just Dbags. But, by all means, carry on.

Since it has now come out that he sold the photos to the family and refused to give them to the people they were suing does that change your opinion?

Apparently he came to a reasonable agreement with the widow and didn't gouge her after all. And he did right by her by standing up for his rights and not giving them to her legal adversaries.

 

[sixpack]

Well Rick S. you did not read the Court Case. It involved California Shield Law, and First Amendment Rights. Remember California Shield Law, it was part of the OJ Trail, and involved unpublished reporter notes.

The family aka as the Plaintiff in the Case had a set of photo, it was the Defendants, like the Motor Cycle Company, Helmet Company, City where the crash occurred, etc. who wanted a FREE SET.

When I said no to a FREE Set they served me with a Subpoena, think I would give up my property to them, and we went to Court over principal.

The Judge Rules had the Defendant asked the Plaintiffs Attorney for a SET THEY WOULD HAVE HAD TO GIVE UP A SET under something legal terms called Discovery. The share of evidence before trail by both parties.

The Attorneys for the Defendants, never ask for what they had a right to from the Plaintiff Attorneys.

So you painting a picture of me to fit your agenda of hold up some poor family up like a highway bandit or? That was BU****IT, as the Attorney representing the family got a set that they paid the going rate for at the time.

THIS THREAD HAS GONE TO CRAP,HAS BEEN HI JACKED, AND IS LIKE A SHIP WITH NO RUDDED.

Thank you for standing your ground on that. It is a precedent that is protecting photojournalists to this day.

 

[KRJ]

Since it has now come out that he sold the photos to the family and refused to give them to the people they were suing does that change your opinion?

Apparently he came to a reasonable agreement with the widow and didn't gouge her after all. And he did right by her by standing up for his rights and not giving them to her legal adversaries.

Absolutely. Going by the facts presented here, and he was not disputing any of them until now... yeah, I have no problem with how he handled it, if accurate.....

 

[sixpack]

Absolutely. Going by the facts presented here, and he was not disputing any them until now... yeah, I have no problem with how he handled it, if accurate.....

Me too. I feel a bit sheepish :embarrassed2:

 

[shinobi]

Me too. I feel a bit sheepish :embarrassed2:

The article says 1994. 20 years ago. Pretty easy to find more up-to-date things to point a finger at

 

[Poolplaya9]

yes, kudos to a great human being... I'm pretty sure the courts determined what was fair and fair is the going rate... not the ransom rate from a distraught and grieving widow. Yes, coco should be so proud

What you are essentially saying is that a person or business shouldn't be able to charge whatever they feel like for their product or service. And you have to know how silly that is. It seems as if you are just letting strong (and understandable) feelings replace logic leaving you irrational and unable to reason in this particular case, and that can be an easy pitfall to fall into. The customer doesn't get to dictate the price based on what they feel like paying. If you don't agree, tell me what business you are in so I can tell you what payment you are going to accept from me for your product or service. And you have to accept my offer, because the customer dictates the prices, right? Of course not. You set your price and I either buy it, or I don't. End of story.

It turns out the scenario isn't even what everyone thought it was, but had it been sixpack was exactly right in that based on your logic the lawyer representing the widow should accept whatever payment the grieving widow offered, if any at all, because she was a grieving widow. And the funeral home should accept whatever payment the grieving widow offered, if any at all, because she was a grieving widow. And etc for everyone else involved with the widow right on down the line. Ridiculous. Haven't heard anything so utterly devoid of even a millionth of an ounce of logic in quite some time. Normally I agree with you and you generally are right on with most things but on this one you couldn't be further off base.

 

[15cherries]

back tp pool!

Hey, chicagorj, good for you man, how in the heck do you play pool with a tube coming out of your pecker???

 

[Banks]

What you are essentially saying is that a person or business shouldn't be able to charge whatever they feel like for their product or service. And you have to know how silly that is. It seems as if you are just letting strong (and understandable) feelings replace logic leaving you irrational and unable to reason in this particular case, and that can be an easy pitfall to fall into. The customer doesn't get to dictate the price based on what they feel like paying. If you don't agree, tell me what business you are in so I can tell you what payment you are going to accept from me for your product or service. And you have to accept my offer, because the customer dictates the prices, right? Of course not. You set your price and I either buy it, or I don't. End of story.

It turns out the scenario isn't even what everyone thought it was, but had it been sixpack was exactly right in that based on your logic the lawyer representing the widow should accept whatever payment the grieving widow offered, if any at all, because she was a grieving widow. And the funeral home should accept whatever payment the grieving widow offered, if any at all, because she was a grieving widow. And etc for everyone else involved with the widow right on down the line. Ridiculous. Haven't heard anything so utterly devoid of even a millionth of an ounce of logic in quite some time. Normally I agree with you and you generally are right on with most things but on this one you couldn't be further off base.

So, oil companies should just charge us $20/gallon. Nobody should dislike them for it either, because it's business and not socialism.

Also, if I ever get another jury request or get asked to be a witness, there's going to be a fat paycheck attached.

Some things just don't belong in certain situations.. like this thread or it's diversion into NPR.

 

[Poolplaya9]

THIS THREAD HAS GONE TO CRAP...

In all fairness it was crap starting with your very first post. It didn't go to crap, it started there. I have defended you against unwarranted attack, but you have to admit starting a thread wanting someone to pay an entry fee over a comment that is years old and that was never even an offer to begin with probably wasn't the greatest use of logic on your part either there.

 

[Poolplaya9]

So, oil companies should just charge us $20/gallon. Nobody should dislike them for it either, because it's business and not socialism.

Also, if I ever get another jury request or get asked to be a witness, there's going to be a fat paycheck attached.

Some things just don't belong in certain situations.. like this thread or it's diversion into NPR.

There should be exceptionally few exceptions to being free to charge what you want, and I mean exceptionally few. Yes, if some oil company wants to charge $20/gallon, then I have ZERO problem with it. The market will dictate what is fair, like it already has (which is why nobody is charging $20).

But since you seem to feel different, tell me what product or service your company sells, and I will tell you what you are allowed to charge. And you must honor it, since you don't believe in your right to charge what you want.

 

[KRJ]

Hey, chicagorj, good for you man, how in the heck do you play pool with a tube coming out of your pecker???

It's not easy, but the ladies seem to really like it

 

[sixpack]

The article says 1994. 20 years ago. Pretty easy to find more up-to-date things to point a finger at

No! I want to argue endlessly on the internet about something that happened 20 years ago!

 

[KRJ]

What you are essentially saying is that a person or business shouldn't be able to charge whatever they feel like for their product or service. And you have to know how silly that is. It seems as if you are just letting strong (and understandable) feelings replace logic leaving you irrational and unable to reason in this particular case, and that can be an easy pitfall to fall into. The customer doesn't get to dictate the price based on what they feel like paying. If you don't agree, tell me what business you are in so I can tell you what payment you are going to accept from me for your product or service. And you have to accept my offer, because the customer dictates the prices, right? Of course not. You set your price and I either buy it, or I don't. End of story.

It turns out the scenario isn't even what everyone thought it was, but had it been sixpack was exactly right in that based on your logic the lawyer representing the widow should accept whatever payment the grieving widow offered, if any at all, because she was a grieving widow. And the funeral home should accept whatever payment the grieving widow offered, if any at all, because she was a grieving widow. And etc for everyone else involved with the widow right on down the line. Ridiculous. Haven't heard anything so utterly devoid of even a millionth of an ounce of logic in quite some time. Normally I agree with you and you generally are right on with most things but on this one you couldn't be further off base.

Dude, I never, ever said they can't charge what they want. But, I can call them dbags if they over charge for something because somebody grieving needs the info to settle a death lawsuit... which this appears did not happen here... so, as they say, the point is moot.

 

[PINKLADY]

In all fairness it was crap starting with your very first post. It didn't go to crap, it started there. I have defended you against unwarranted attack, but you have to admit starting a thread wanting someone to pay an entry fee over a comment that is years old and that was never even an offer to begin with probably wasn't the greatest use of logic on your part either there.

agreed. hence, the useless rhetoric - myself included.

 

[Poolplaya9]

Dude, I never, ever said they can't charge what they want. But, I can call them dbags if they over charge for something because somebody grieving needs the info to settle a death lawsuit... which this appears did not happen here... so, as they say, the point is moot.

Grieving is immaterial. You really think you should get discounts for being sad? Or because you need a product? Most people need the product they are buying, hence the reason for buying it, right? Needing something or being sad are not reasons to be able to dictate what you feel like paying, but according to you there are. So, I'm still waiting to hear what product or service your company offers so I can tell you what I feel like paying for it. I may just need it, and I'm feeling sad today...

 

[Banks]

There should be exceptionally few exceptions to being free to charge what you want, and I mean exceptionally few. Yes, if some oil company wants to charge $20/gallon, then I have ZERO problem with it. The market will dictate what is fair, like it already has (which is why nobody is charging $20).

But since you seem to feel different, tell me what product or service your company sells, and I will tell you what you are allowed to charge. And you must honor it, since you don't believe in your right to charge what you want.

Oh, wait, there should be exceptions? I just want to clarify your stance on this first. Of course, that would be primarily to show you that even you can't agree with a zero-tolerance approach. Others would have their own lists. Where do the lists end? Do you meet somewhere in the middle, where now you'll be agreeing to exceptions that you don't want?

Also, there are many cases in which the market is not allowed to dictate the price.

Maybe you can tell me what product or service you deal with and it would most likely be pretty easy to find something, direct or indirect, that suffers from some sort of price-control. Ever had a loan?

 

[lost]

agreed. hence, the useless rhetoric - myself included.

So since I was 1st to post in this thread

"Originally Posted by lost
Your signature is just too funny ;-)"

And got this reply
"This post is not about my signature"

I, in essence was right all along? :grin:

//// end of thread?

 

[Poolplaya9]

Oh, wait, there should be exceptions? I just want to clarify your stance on this first. Of course, that would be primarily to show you that even you can't agree with a zero-tolerance approach. Others would have their own lists. Where do the lists end? Do you meet somewhere in the middle, where now you'll be agreeing to exceptions that you don't want?

Also, there are many cases in which the market is not allowed to dictate the price.

Maybe you can tell me what product or service you deal with and it would most likely be pretty easy to find something, direct or indirect, that suffers from some sort of price-control. Ever had a loan?

I don't even know if they are really exceptions. I used that word for cases like jury duty, where I agree that everyone should have to serve. That isn't a product or service someone is selling though, so it really isn't an exception. Off the top of my head I can't think of anything that is or should be a true exception to letting people charge what they want for the product or service they sell. I do agree with laws that don't allow collusion among multiple parties for price fixing (because price fixing attempts to defeat the free market principles), but that isn't an exception that is preventing any one person from charging what they want either.

 

[KRJ]

Grieving is immaterial. You really think you should get discounts for being sad? Or because you need a product? Most people need the product they are buying, hence the reason for buying it, right? Needing something or being sad are not reasons to be able to dictate what you feel like paying, but according to you there are. So, I'm still waiting to hear what product or service your company offers so I can tell you what I feel like paying for it. I may just need it, and I'm feeling sad today...

But over charging what the reasonable and customary rate for something so simple... accident scene photos, because you suspect there might be a lawsuit, and you might be able to squeeze more money out of them because your a parasite...... then have at it.

Again, anyone can do it, hell attorneys do it everyday, does not make them any less scummy in my book.

So, I do get it. You would and I would not. Great. We will have to agree to disagree. I'm leaving this thread now, my head hurts and I'm gonna go play pool

 

[TX Poolnut]

. . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . ,.-‘”. . . . . . . . . .``~.,*
. . . . . . . .. . . . . .,.-”. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .“-.,*
. . . . .. . . . . . ..,/. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ”:,*
. . . . . . . .. .,?. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .\,*
. . . . . . . . . /. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ,}*
. . . . . . . . ./. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ,:`^`.}*
. . . . . . . ./. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ,:”. . . ./*
. . . . . . .?. . . __. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . :`. . . ./*
. . . . . . . /__.(. . .“~-,_. . . . . . . . . . . . . . ,:`. . . .. ./*
. . . . . . /(_. . ”~,_. . . ..“~,_. . . . . . . . . .,:`. . . . _/*
. . . .. .{.._$;_. . .”=,_. . . .“-,_. . . ,.-~-,}, .~”; /. .. .}*
. . .. . .((. . .*~_. . . .”=-._. . .“;,,./`. . /” . . . ./. .. ../*
. . . .. . .\`~,. . ..“~.,. . . . . . . . . ..`. . .}. . . . . . ../*
. . . . . .(. ..`=-,,. . . .`. . . . . . . . . . . ..(. . . ;_,,-”*
. . . . . ../.`~,. . ..`-.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . ..\. . /\*
. . . . . . \`~.*-,. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ..|,./.....\,__*
,,_. . . . . }.>-._\. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .|. . . . . . ..`=~-,
. .. `=~-,_\_. . . `\,. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .\*
. . . . . . . . . .`=~-,,.\,. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .\*
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . `:,, . . . . . . . . . . . . . `\. . . . . . ..__*
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .`=-,. . . . . . . . . .,%`>--==``*
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . _\. . . . . ._,-%. . . ..`\