X expands lawsuit over advertiser ‘boycott’ to include Lego, Nestlé, Pinterest, and others | TechCrunch
-
[email protected]replied to [email protected] last edited by
You can also have friends if you just pay mercenaries to kidnap them from the street at gunpoint. Many many great friends at boy time.
-
[email protected]replied to [email protected] last edited by
Nothing says you believe in free market competition more, than suing a another private business, trying to force them to give you money
-
In an actual court? In Trumps america?
-
[email protected]replied to [email protected] last edited by
You know you've fucked up when even Nestlé doesn't want to work with you...
Obligatory Fuck Nesté
-
[email protected]replied to [email protected] last edited by
In a sane world, this lawsuit would be laughed out of court.
-
[email protected]replied to [email protected] last edited by
What person in it right mind initiate a legal battle with Nestlé??
-
[email protected]replied to [email protected] last edited by
Thank you for putting it into perspective a little bit. I still won't buy Nestlé stuff but at least now I'll feel guilty buying anything else lol
-
[email protected]replied to [email protected] last edited by
Elon is a twat and a menace for sure, but Nestlé have employed business strategies that literally killed infants and caused malnourishment...they are a completely different league of evil.
-
[email protected]replied to [email protected] last edited by
Plenty actually, like former slaves from plantations which sold products to Nestle.
...it's part of the reason why Nestle is currently lobbying the EU to not dilute the supply chain act, those kinds of cases are a PITA for them, and the documentation they need to do for the supply chain act is exactly what they need to nib cases in the bud, "Here's the inspections we did, here are transcripts of anonymous interviews with random workers at the plantation", "If something slipped between the cracks we deeply regret that but we did do our due diligence, plaintiff's beef is with their ex boss, not with us".
It is absolutely more expensive to pay an army of lawyers to defend yourself than it is to pay workers proper local wages and document that. Not to mention that people who run slave plantations don't share their extra profit with Nestle.
The other reason is that they don't want smaller companies to have a competitive advantage because they're not subject to those kinds of lawsuits.They're also not at all keen on a consumer boycott from Africa.
-
[email protected]replied to [email protected] last edited by
Tbf every body needs an asshole. Except the us, which seems to have two.
-
[email protected]replied to [email protected] last edited by
Throwing a temper tantrum because no-one wants to play with you. What a child!
-
[email protected]replied to [email protected] last edited by
The States Parties to the present Covenant recognize the right of everyone to an adequate standard of living for himself and his family, including adequate food, clothing and housing, and to the continuous improvement of living conditions. The States Parties will take appropriate steps to ensure the realization of this right, recognizing to this effect the essential importance of international co-operation based on free consent.
"food" here can be safely assumed to include "water". "Everyone" means "also people who can't afford fidget spinners". There's exactly one country in the world which didn't ratify the ICESCR and it's the US.
-
[email protected]replied to [email protected] last edited by
Key part of that sentence is "so far"
-
[email protected]replied to [email protected] last edited by
It's harder to laugh it out of court when the plaintiff is in the government himself.
-
[email protected]replied to [email protected] last edited by
You just know that's going to be exhibit 1 for the defense.
Fucking fascist Nazi man baby doesn't like when advertisers do what he tells them, and then continues to do so when he realizes that was a bad idea.
-
[email protected]replied to [email protected] last edited by
Possibly, but none of those bought judges matter unless it ends up in their specific court. That's why they've been trying to install as many of their own as possible.
-
[email protected]replied to [email protected] last edited by
There's gotta be serious repercussions for this insane narcissist-autocratic behaviour. USA you're not just embarrassing, but a liability.
-
[email protected]replied to [email protected] last edited by
Reminds me of the guy who was accused by his gf of impregnating her, then refusing to support the child. Went through everything: the lawyers, friends and family who questioned his manhood and unwilling ess to take responsibility for the child, harassment, threats from her friends, etc. finally ended up in court in front of a judge, where he calmly produced a letter from a doctor that had performed a vasectomy on him well before the child could possibly have been conceived, took the win and walked out.
I would pay to watch this rich spoilt man child have to eat his literal words. I'm sure it's screenshotted all over the internet, but his ego won't let him see the truth.
-
[email protected]replied to [email protected] last edited by
When people go we may use child slaves in our supply chain, steal and ruin water supplies, and bribe medical professionals to get discourage breastfeeding, but you're too fucked up for us to work with then you know you've fucked up.
-
[email protected]replied to [email protected] last edited by
Are boycotts illegal? In this case I doubt there was an organized attempt, just some companies making individual business decisions. But even if Twitter can prove there was a boycott, is there a law against that?