DirectNic Demands SlicksNetwork.com Hand Over Model IDs

[Hammer]

Originally Posted by sarettah

Hammer, I propose to you the same bet I proposed with rhetorical http://www.oprano.com/msgboard/showthread.php?t=51383

It'll be a shame to see you go.

[sarettah]

Originally Posted by Hammer

It'll be a shame to see you go.

I take it that that is an aceptance

Originally Posted by Hammer

We are constantly fighting for our constitutrional rights in this business and along comes an organization that tramples all over them

Last I checked, your constitutional rights end right at my doorstep.

[softball]

Last I checked, your constitutional rights end right at my doorstep.

Not being a constitutional expert, I would guess you are very wrong on that count. You might think about checking again.

[Hammer]

I take it that that is an aceptance

Sure, why not. Oprano won't miss either of us.

Last I checked, your constitutional rights end right at my doorstep.

huh? I'm guessing you mean if I come into your house you have the right to do illegal things to me because I no longer have any rights? So you could rape me and it would be okay. Or you could rob me or kill me? Since none of those are true, just what constitutional rights end at your doorstep? You can't even shoot me unless your life is threatened and even then a good attorney could get you convicted of murder.

But, what does any of that have to do with the current argument that what DirectNic did is unconstitutional?

[sarettah]

Originally Posted by Hammer

Sure, why not. Oprano won't miss either of us.

huh? I'm guessing you mean if I come into your house you have the right to do illegal things to me because I no longer have any rights? So you could rape me and it would be okay. Or you could rob me or kill me? Since none of those are true, just what constitutional rights end at your doorstep? You can't even shoot me unless your life is threatened and even then a good attorney could get you convicted of murder.

But, what does any of that have to do with the current argument that what DirectNic did is unconstitutional?

lolol...You are confused. You are listing things that are against the law not things that are your constitutional right.

Let's see now.


Amendment I
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances.

Your right to free speech ends at my doorstep as I can have you arrested for walking into my house and abusing me verbally. Your right to exercise your religion ends at my doorstep, again, you come in and throw down some prayer mats and start praying and if I call the cops, you will be at least escorted from my house if not arrested. Yor right to assemble ends at my doorstep, go ahead get a few people to assemble in my living room uninvited and the cops will again remove you for me.


Amendment II
A well regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed.

You bring a weapon into my house and again, the cops will help me out, not you. In fact, in Florida if you bring a weapon into my house I can shoot your ass.


Amendment IV
The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.

Unless of course I put the condition that you are subject to search and seizure upon entering my doorstep. In fact, if you bring personal articles into my house and I grab them and search them you would have absolutely no legal recourse.


Amendment V
No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a grand jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the militia, when in actual service in time of war or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offense to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation.


You can't be compelled to be a witness against yourself but if you tell me something in confidence and I take it to the authorities, it not only can be used against you but as Joe Friday would say, it WILL be used against you so you have incriminated yourself even though you have the right not to.

(Favorite Ron White line: I had the right to remain silent, unfortunately......I didn't have the ability)

What this has to do with the directnic thing is that they are a private company, they created terms and conditions for a contract with them and those terms and conditions were agreed to. Unless a court of law says that those terms and conditions are not enforceable then those terms and conditions stand. Since no court has made such a detemination then for right now that contract must be considered valid. In fact, the lack of action by Slick and his layer to get an injunction against directnic not allowing them to enforce their contract would indicate to me that his lawyer is thinking that the contract is enforceable.

If the contract were so blatantly unenforceable as everyone is saying, so blatantly unconstitutional as all the gfy lawyers say, it would take about $300 and half a day to get in front of a federal judge to get an injunction prohibiting directnic from taking the actions they did. And yes, it would be federal because slick and directnic are not in the same state and it is therefore related to interstate commerce which is completely the feds purview.

When Slick agreed to directnic's terms and conditions, he set foot inside of their doorstep and as I said, the constitution ends at my doorstep (in this case directnic's doorstep).

This is not free speech case. This is a contract case, pure and simple.

[sarettah]

Originally Posted by Hammer

Sure, why not. Oprano won't miss either of us.

Well, I really don't have the dislike for you that I do for rhetorical so how's bout we make it a monetary bet instead. I can go to $100. I'm not rich so I am not willing to gamble $1000 like the bigwigs are...lol... But make it wherever you feel comfortable between $1 and $100 (or a couple of drinks at a show) and I would be just as ageeable.

Either way works for me

[Hammer]

Originally Posted by sarettah

Well, I really don't have the dislike for you that I do for rhetorical so how's bout we make it a monetary bet instead. I can go to $100. I'm not rich so I am not willing to gamble $1000 like the bigwigs are...lol... But make it wherever you feel comfortable between $1 and $100 (or a couple of drinks at a show) and I would be just as ageeable.

Either way works for me

Okay, you can just buy me a couple of drinks at the next show.

[sarettah]

Originally Posted by Hammer

Okay, you can just buy me a couple of drinks at the next show.

I will look forward to a few Hammer beers myself