To LUGNET HomepageTo LUGNET News HomepageTo LUGNET Guide Homepage
 Help on Searching
 
Post new message to lugnet.off-topic.debateOpen lugnet.off-topic.debate in your NNTP NewsreaderTo LUGNET News Traffic PageSign In (Members)
 Off-Topic / Debate / 5829
5828  |  5830
Subject: 
Re: smokers
Newsgroups: 
lugnet.off-topic.debate
Date: 
Tue, 6 Jun 2000 07:02:39 GMT
Viewed: 
213 times
  
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Frank Filz writes:

I would say so. No one has weighed in with a reasonable negative reason, and
several people have raised the issue of severe asthma, so, look for my post
in lugnet.market.services (I'm not sure what the best group for this is, but
it seems more like a service and certainly isn't an auction).

Seems pretty clear cut to me. When you enter a marketplace you give up certain
privacy rights relating to information that has a clear impact on the market.
For example, people may comment on the quality of your merchandise, your
timelyness, your dispute resulution process and so forth. That's public
information unless you explicitly a priori executed a contract stating it isn't
(which may not be enforceable, not sure, contract law class was 20 years ago
for me at this point... great class, though!). Smoke impacts pieces, beyond a
shadow of a doubt. Hence it has bearing on merchandise quality. Hence in the
usual course of events it's fair game for public knowledge.

I would expect any seller who took offense to be basically trying to hide
important information about their merchandise. And in the final analysis,
that's fraud. Just a little fraud, but fraud just the same. Any claim of
slander or defamation by the seller is easily defeated by use of the truth,
some smoke is indeed present on the pieces sold. Hence no slander.

Caveat emptor, of course, if you the buyer don't ask you can't complain. But if
you do ask you have a reasonable expectation of a true answer to base your
buying decision on, which expectation, if not met, is grounds for contract
termination and possible damages.

++Lar (it all comes down to rights analysis :-)  )



Message is in Reply To:
  Re: smokers
 
Christopher Weeks wrote in message ... (...) that's (...) It (...) I would say so. No one has weighed in with a reasonable negative reason, and several people have raised the issue of severe asthma, so, look for my post in lugnet.market.services (...) (24 years ago, 6-Jun-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

17 Messages in This Thread:






Entire Thread on One Page:
Nested:  All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:  All | Brief | Compact
    

Custom Search

©2005 LUGNET. All rights reserved. - hosted by steinbruch.info GbR