Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 11-24-2008, 09:47 AM
 
Location: deafened by howls of 'racism!!!'
52,792 posts, read 34,700,369 times
Reputation: 29352

Advertisements

what a country..

Quote:
A US couple is suing McDonald's for $3m (£2m) after nude photos of the woman, which were on her husband's mobile phone, ended up on the internet.
BBC NEWS | Americas | McDonald's sued over nude photos
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 11-24-2008, 09:55 AM
 
Location: NH and lovin' it!
1,780 posts, read 3,936,478 times
Reputation: 1332
Wow. I guess the advice about not writing anything you wouldn't want the world to know goes for having nude pictures taken. I hope they win the lawsuit, though.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-24-2008, 10:05 AM
 
Location: Tyler, TX
23,861 posts, read 24,160,330 times
Reputation: 15143
Quote:
I hope they win the lawsuit, though.
Why should they win? The article mentions no evidence that McDonald's is at fault in any way. A customer could have found the phone and sent them to his device before turning it in. The husband could have left the Bluetooth settings too lax and someone could have copied them from across the room. Someone could have hacked into his account on the provider's website, a-la Paris Hilton.

Unless you have more information than what's in the article, there is absolutely no justification whatsoever for your statement.

Three million is a bit steep, too. It screams "frivolous" to me.

They had to move? Come on.

This whole thing stinks. *IF* a McDonald's employee is responsible, and I believe it should be proven and not assumed, then they are entitled to something for their privacy being invaded. Three million is out of line, and out of the question. One hundred thousand, tops.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-24-2008, 10:18 AM
 
16,294 posts, read 28,570,759 times
Reputation: 8384
They want their stupidity reward.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-24-2008, 10:23 AM
 
695 posts, read 1,379,320 times
Reputation: 142
I bought a used cell phone a couple years ago, after one of ours busted.

Got a bunch of thong shots left on the camera phone. And believe me, they were NOT pictures you wanted to see before dinner - unless, of course, you're on a diet...
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-24-2008, 10:39 AM
 
7,331 posts, read 15,412,689 times
Reputation: 3801
Lame lawsuit. The only think I gained from that article was the knowledge that the dollar has really gained strength against the pound! Under a buck fifty? That'll be nice, since I have to travel to the UK for work in a couple of months.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-24-2008, 02:54 PM
 
Location: NH and lovin' it!
1,780 posts, read 3,936,478 times
Reputation: 1332
Quote: Unless you have more information than what's in the article, there is absolutely no justification whatsoever for your statement.

The way the article was written seemed to me to indicate there was fault on the part of McDonald's. Why jump down my throat about it? I'm not the one who filed the lawsuit. Is it that important to you?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-24-2008, 03:00 PM
 
Location: Tyler, TX
23,861 posts, read 24,160,330 times
Reputation: 15143
Quote:
Originally Posted by JoanD'Arc View Post
The way the article was written seemed to me to indicate there was fault on the part of McDonald's.
Are you that easily manipulated? You went from knowing nothing whatsoever about the case to assuming guilt based on one very short article that was extremely lean on detail.

I'm not surprised that our elections turn out the way they do in this country, with people convinced this easily and all...
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-24-2008, 03:11 PM
 
Location: NH and lovin' it!
1,780 posts, read 3,936,478 times
Reputation: 1332
Quote:
Originally Posted by swagger View Post
Are you that easily manipulated? You went from knowing nothing whatsoever about the case to assuming guilt based on one very short article that was extremely lean on detail.

I'm not surprised that our elections turn out the way they do in this country, with people convinced this easily and all...
You, sir, are in danger of being a flamer and I take offense at your insinuations.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-24-2008, 03:22 PM
 
Location: Tyler, TX
23,861 posts, read 24,160,330 times
Reputation: 15143
Quote:
Originally Posted by JoanD'Arc View Post
You, sir, are in danger of being a flamer and I take offense at your insinuations.


It's not my job to be nice to you. I am for hire, though.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
Similar Threads

All times are GMT -6.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top