Jeeze Jman8. Sounds like you are in a Bad Mood.
What happened, did the Packers get beat on Sunday or Something?
- Status
Jeeze Jman8. Sounds like you are in a Bad Mood.
What happened, did the Packers get beat on Sunday or Something?
Obviously, the law firm doesn't agree.
Noticed one of the attorneys handling this case just won $45 million from Sketchers for false advertising.
When asked in this thread or countless others where 5P advertised DA/P free, no one responded. Had to go with claims from employees. 5P acknowledges that error and either stated or implied that the employee was reprimanded. Thus acting on their own. Arguably acting outside of procedures within company.
For the lawsuit to hold as accurate, 5P executives would have to be shown as knowingly lying. To understand this another way is the spinning. That's where courts will determine the veracity of claims (whether they knowingly lied, or not).
I currently cannot think of a vaping company that is not engaged in deceptive practices by the standard of this suit. If you think you can I'd like to hear it. I'm sure you can't or will not share that information. I feel very confident that if I wanted to nail say VP live sponsors on "deceptive marketing" as explained in this suit, I could. Though I wonder if WH would go after them given conflict of interest and all. Probably would as Russ is just a pawn in the game.
Dude truncated my post. Cut out what he said I didn't seemingly have a clue on and proceeded to post as if I had no idea what I was talking about. That be a serious violation of forum rules. Did all this to attack the poster, not the ideas up for discussion.
Not True.
If I am in a Controlling Capacity of a Company, It doesn't need to be Shown that I Lied or Implement a Deceptive Practice. Only that the Company or it's Agents Lied or Engaged in a Deceptive Practice.
I think if you had More Experience in a Business setting, you would understand this Better. Because You seem to be viewing Everything from the Perspective of an Individual. Instead of the Perspective of a Business.
If "agents lied" then for sure I could nail any vaping business. Would be kind of fun going after VP Live ones and getting all that recorded. I look forward to WH doing that. Not that I'll be happy with vaping company getting attacked, but happy with the hypocrisy being fully exploited by key witch hunters.
I think you may wish to stick to points up for discussion rather than addressing what you perceive as lack of understanding from those who you are in discussion with.
Could have been an Honest Mistake.
And I was it Really that "Serious" of a Violation? I've seen a Lot Worse.
LOL
Did you Listen to Russ's "Five Pawn: Shame, Shame, Shame show by Any Chance. The One where he Call Five Pawns and Ask Specifically about Da and AP?
---
Like I said before, I Don't know why you are Making Such a Big Deal over all this?
If the Lawsuit is Without Merit, then it will be Thrown Out. And if it Has Merit, then that is How Disagreements are Settled in a Non Regulated Market.
Disagree. Post my whole post and the comments against me suddenly don't make sense. So only honest mistake here would be that @Racehorse didn't read my full post, and proceeded to truncate and then proceeded to make it look like I didn't even consider an aspect of reasonable consideration.
I think if truncating stops, we can put this issue behind us and get back to discussing the points up for discussion rather than assuming some get the lawsuit and some don't.
Let it Go. People can Read a Thread and know what is Going on.
This is Turning into a Dead Horse Beating anyway.
Yes.
I've already explained many times why I see it as a big deal. I honestly see it as big of a deal as FDA deeming. It is very much like comparing FSPTCA (which is a big deal) with MSA (which is also a big deal). And arguably MSA and all that entails is a bigger deal. I see this suit as precursor (by ANTZ-friendly legal teams) to take many companies down.
I mean the fact they have same type of suit against NJOY really ought to be wake up call for naysayers in this thread. Why is that downplayed in the discussion? Do you think NJOY engaged in false advertising? The lawsuit goes through virtually the same rhetoric and tactics to establish that case. So this particular law firm is knowingly bringing 2 lawsuits related to "deceptive marketing" against 2 vaping companies, and does anyone seriously think it'll stop there?
So part of the reason why I harp on all this is they are saying in the lawsuit (as they ought to) that "reasonable consumers wouldn't believe thus and so." We be those consumers. Therefore, if you truly believe 5P has deserved this lawsuit, and perhaps also are okay with 'letting courts decide' on NJOY case, then it really does impact the whole thing going forward.
Would very much be like saying just ignore FDA deeming, and let industry take care of that. We aren't stakeholders. Our calls to action aren't going to matter. Why bother? And THEN, if anyone seeks to hold a discussion on it, as if we consumers ought to care about this massive attack on industry (which technically hasn't occurred yet, as FDA deeming hasn't gone through), saying that those people don't get what FDA deeming is about. It's just for industry stakeholders and that you are reading too much into it to think consumers will be impacted. That we'll be fine and the righteous businesses will be around and everything will be okay.
Fun Game Break:
Say, we knew 1 poster in this thread had a giant picture of himself on his ceiling, above his bed.....who would it be?
Say, we knew 1 poster in this thread had a giant picture of himself on his ceiling, above his bed.....who would it be?
I think the Small Point that you are Missing is that in a Non-Regulated, Free Market, the Courts are the Only Arbiters to settle Disputes.
And I just Don't see this Having much Bearing on the Future of e-Cigarettes. Seeing that the Final Rule set is sitting at the OMB/OIRA as we speak.
I get that. But do you not see this as ANTZ-friendly legal team? If not, what would ANTZ-friendly legal team look like to you?
That's fine. But now you understand why I'm making the big deal out of it. I do see it that way. Imagine if you were only person on ECF who thought FDA deeming was a big deal. Just imagine that for a few seconds. And you were spouting off all the things we've all said over the years, but in this hypothetical, you're the only one doing that.
Personally, I really do think Bill G. and the others like him (Carl, etc.) will say a similar thing to what I'm conveying. I may be mistaken, but I really don't think I am. I'm trying to persuade you right now to consider it a big deal, but perhaps the messenger doesn't work for you. I do think if Bill G. does frame this in way I am, that many people will not so readily side with plaintiffs or will instead see the lawsuit as a very bad thing. Extremely bad thing.
Also just wish to add that I feel confident that the lawsuit and deeming are connected in an orchestrated way. I don't think it will stop with 5P, and thus is just a small step that is part of a coordinated attack by our actual opposition. I'm certain you know who I identify as our actual opposition.
It means more than that in a court of law.
It's the basis why your claim is made. With out proper foundation
which includes the harm caused by diketones which also is the basis
behind the reason of your claim of monetary claim you have to prove
the first harm that led to the harm you are claiming.
Simply not liking it or wanting it are not sufficient.
Mike
I just don't see Everything as ANTZ Driven. And No. I don't see this as an "ANTZ-friendly" legal Team.
I think Lumping everyone into ANTZ's just because you Don't Agree with what they Say or Do is Kinda One Dimensional.
I really think you are just doing the "Harm has to be Caused by Diketones" thing on purpose.
And what is the Difference Anyway? If the Suit has No Merit, and the Forum Lawyers here are Right, then it will get Thrown Out.
So No Harm - No Foul.
I will try to explain it once again, foundation, the the brick and motor of what your claim
is based upon. With out proper foundation there can be no claim. Wait there's more.
We are no where close to the not introduced as evidence phase.
If you don't understand the legal hurdles that's ok. I only have a rudimentary understanding.
Harm or likely hood of harm has to be proved. Without that they have nothing.
mike
- Status
Similar threads
