NationStates Jolt Archive

http://cbs.marketwatch.com/news/story.asp?guid=%7B70CE3887-CF58-4718-93D6-CF1190D73B8C%7D&siteid=google&dist=google
I love it. After fifteen years and a huge embarrassment, the plantiffs want to keep fighting McDonalds, even though it has no interest in collecting damages. This is just rich.

Helen Steel and David Morris are heroes of the anti-globalisation movement. This case was never just about resisting McDonald's libel claims. It was about exposing to the world the depths of McDonalds' expolitation and corruption.

Helen Steel and David Morris are heroes of the anti-globalisation movement. This case was never just about resisting McDonald's libel claims. It was about exposing to the world the depths of McDonalds' expolitation and corruption.
What if it isn't there?

Helen Steel and David Morris are heroes of the anti-globalisation movement. This case was never just about resisting McDonald's libel claims. It was about exposing to the world the depths of McDonalds' expolitation and corruption.
No. The case was dragged on to humiliate McDonalds. Helen Steel and David Morris need to cool down.
And as for free trade, I gladly support it. I'm sorry you don't, despite the fact that it has made Ireland the fastest growing economy in Europe.

I remember hearing about this in economics class. Even though I'm no fan of McDonalds, the plantiffs came off as complete nutters who broke the law and then hastly scuttled about playing the blame game ("OH NOES, we can't afford to get our evidence brought over from another country!" "Well then maybe you should have waited until you HAD the evidence before making the stupid pamphlets, dipshit")

There are ways to go about things, and commiting libel and getting labeled as idiots and crackpots really isn't the best way.

But then, everything I know about the case I saw in a 45-minute video three years ago. So meh.

http://cbs.marketwatch.com/news/story.asp?guid=%7B70CE3887-CF58-4718-93D6-CF1190D73B8C%7D&siteid=google&dist=google
I love it. After fifteen years and a huge embarrassment, the plantiffs want to keep fighting McDonalds, even though it has no interest in collecting damages. This is just rich.
after 15 years anything they collect will be going to their lawyers

I remember hearing about this in economics class. Even though I'm no fan of McDonalds, the plantiffs came off as complete nutters who broke the law and then hastly scuttled about playing the blame game ("OH NOES, we can't afford to get our evidence brought over from another country!" "Well then maybe you should have waited until you HAD the evidence before making the stupid pamphlets, dipshit")

There are ways to go about things, and commiting libel and getting labeled as idiots and crackpots really isn't the best way.

But then, everything I know about the case I saw in a 45-minute video three years ago. So meh.
I'm sorry, they are defendents. That was my fault.
In any case, I did read Fast Food Nation, which described every detail of the case. While libel probably did happen (as McDonald's doesn't spray the rainforest with agent orange, as their pamphlet claims), McDonald's did use some questionable methods to build a case. They planted spies in their group. They even used the Metropolitan Police for fact finding and survellance. Still, this case has gone on for far too long.

I'm sorry, they are defendents. That was my fault.
In any case, I did read Fast Food Nation, which described every detail of the case. While libel probably did happen (as McDonald's doesn't spray the rainforest with agent orange, as their pamphlet claims), McDonald's did use some questionable methods to build a case. They planted spies in their group. They even used the Metropolitan Police for fact finding and survellance. Still, this case has gone on for far too long.

Pish, no apology needed about saying 'plantiffs'. I knew the case too, if I'd thought about it properly I could have corrected it myself.

Well, like I said, I'm no fan of McDonalds. But people like the defendents just make the cause look bad. Now whenever people make claims about McDonalds, the people around them will just roll their eyes and mutter 'McLibel' under the breath, instead of taking it seriously.

So yes, I see it as a case where both sides a wrong - but I'm more disappointed by the people ruining things for MY side of the debate. McDonalds is a large corporation, everyone expects them to be cutthroat bastards anyway.