FUCK this bitch

[Dinsdale]

The law doesn't state that profit is the only requirement needing to be met.

In fact, in KCMancrush's post, it is indeed the first requirement.

[Dinsdale]

But go ahead and cite exactly which one of those legal standards that you've now posted more than once that applies here?

[Shlomart Ben Yisrael]

We have to tread carefully here Marty, as we are debating the two smartest indiviudals on the entire Interwebs

Look, if I were to lead an imaginary hipster lifestyle, it would definitely be in the Dinsdale model.

That guy is (possibly or possibly not) cool!

[Shlomart Ben Yisrael]

I'm amazed Google doesn't just forward all search requests directly to him

I'm still waiting for FaceDins, the social networking site based around half-truths, all-out fabrications and generally speaking, unsolicited information.

I've got some great ideas for my Dins Wall. None of what I post will actually be based either partially or wholly in reality...but that's besides the point.

[Dinsdale]

But go ahead and cite exactly which one of those legal standards that you've now posted more than once that applies here?

I notice you've opted for the "Oh shit, I'm busted... better start slinging insults" tack.

But go ahead and cite exactly which one of those legal standards that you've now posted more than once that applies here?

[mvscal]

Big words

Yes. Big words that you clearly do not understand. Let's go through them.

besmirches some-one's reputation

Was she named? Clearly recognizable on the tape? Does she, in fact, have a reputation that may be "besmirched'? The answer is no.

intrudes upon an individual's private affairs

Doing a header into a fountain at a mall is not a private affair.

proof that the published information was sufficiently private

Again, no. Sufficiently private means that the incident took place where the individual has a reasonable expectation of privacy such as a restroom or locker room etc.

Then there is always the bottom line. She is not going to file suit. Given her track record of unabashed scumbaggery, the only reason for that is the fact that she doesn't have a case and can't find an ambulance chasing dirt bag sufficiently desperate to give it a shot.

[Shlomart Ben Yisrael]

But go ahead and cite exactly which one of those legal standards that you've now posted more than once that applies here?

I notice you've opted for the "Oh shit, I'm busted... better start slinging insults" tack.

But go ahead and cite exactly which one of those legal standards that you've now posted more than once that applies here?

KC Scott already hooked you up with the stats a couple of posts back.

Try following along in this thread rather than grooming your eyebrows or updating your Twitter or whatever the fuck it is you do other than pay attention. I know you have a learning disability, but honk down some more of that "magic candy" your doctor dishes out and focus.

[Dinsdale]

KC Scott already hooked you up with the stats a couple of posts back.

Yeah, see, but since he was wrong, and absolutely clowned himself doing it, I was hoping to be further humored by him citing which example he (incorrectly) believes applies here...

Was all.


And since he wasn't capable of doing so (since none of his examples applied), he's gone into the oh-so-fresh deflect/attack ploy.

[Dinsdale]

Yes. Big words that you clearly do not understand. Let's go through them.

besmirches some-one's reputation

Anyone else find it funny that Scrote's obviously infallable source was pretty generous with the "big words" -- but couldn't manage to spell one that everyone uses every day?

[mvscal]

Yes. Big words that you clearly do not understand. Let's go through them.

besmirches some-one's reputation

Anyone else find it funny that Scrote's obviously infallable source was pretty generous with the "big words" -- but couldn't manage to spell one that everyone uses every day?

Stop trying to weasel out of this by bringing up his "lucid past."

[Dinsdale]

his "lucid past."

I'm going to have to go ahead and drop a...


LINK?

[mvscal]

his "lucid past."

I'm going to have to go ahead and drop a...


LINK?

While attempting to run "big words smack" this Kansas City denizen managed to come up with:

If she chooses not to press forward beacuse of her own lucid past, that has nothing to do with the aforementioned facts of this incident.

It's simply brutal the way they have absolutely no regard for their own asses.

[mvscal]

Your basic argument is anyone in the public can be video taped doing anything and put onto youtube with no reprecussion.

Absolutely 100% correct.

Again I'll ask: why you think TV and movies require anyone on screen to sign waivers and why you think youtube is different?

Because people in TV and movies are....wait for it...PROFITING FROM THE USAGE OF YOUR LIKENESS.

PS: What "typosmack"?

[Mikey]

Think people. Think.

Did he died ?

I doubt he die, but I wouldn't be surprised with the way he landed if he bited his fucking tongue off.

[mvscal]

Now explain how youtube with it's built in commercials is Not For Profit

It's quite simple. Youtube does not post commercials on all videos nor was there a commercial posted on her video which was pulled at her request. In case you are struggling, NOBODY profited from this video in any way shape or form.

[Dinsdale]

So, Scrote -- how did the people who posted the video profit?

Or are you claiming Youtube is liable?

[mvscal]

First he thought the mall was liable now he thinks it might be youtube. He's clueless, flailing wildly and ignoring the painfully obvious.

She couldn't find a lawyer who puts the 'S' in scumbag who would touch this case.

[Dinsdale]

I did say Mall was liable - both Genius disagree

AGAIN -- CITE THE LAW YOU POSTED THAT THE MALL BROKE.


Which one is it?


Can you make a correlation (I don't think that word means what you think it means) between what you cited and what you're trying to infer?

Cause frankly, it ain't working for you.


But please continue to sit there and act like you're somehow superior, or whatever the fuck is wrong with you, all the while making a bigger fool of yourself.


That is, of course, unless you'd care to cite what the mall did wrong, as per your posted (and Scott-like misspelled) "laws."

[poptart]

What the mall did wrong, Dins, as the skank clearly pointed out - is not having security come immediately to the incident.



























... to hold her head down in the water until she drown.

[Dinsdale]

Geniuses should re-read the thread

Is that really what you want?

OK.

her own lucid past

But then it gets better -- he tries to pawn of his unfamiliarity with "big words," after running "big words" smack by... and this is pretty good stuff here...

fat thumbing on T1B

Yeah dude, I can see how that could happen... you know, what with the C and R keys only being two rows apart and stuff.

[smackaholic]

She was clearly recognizable on the video. Her nephew called her the the news her stupidity had gone viral.
Is her reputation besmirched?

Did we watch the same video?

There is no fukking way, barring some special HD version of this video, the woman is identifiable.

From the video I could deduced that the dumbass was:

likely female....

had a short haircut...

carried a large white handbag....

and was a fukking dumbass.

Perhaps her nephew put his mad detective skillz to work, knowing said dumbass worked at the mall ahead of time, and was infact a stupid cunt, deduced that it was her. But seeing as he shares some DNA with this dope, I kinda doubt it.

More likely, she went home and blabbed to everyone about her dumbfukkery. It's how dumbfukks roll.

[smackaholic]

But without a specific case to reference it would seem anyone in the public can be video taped doing anything and put onto youtube with no reprecussions

good to see you're catching on, scrote.

i would also like to point something out here which i doubt has been mentioned yet. this mall like any other mall or other public place that has surveillance cameras likely has a sign or two hanging up saying 'smile bitch, you're on candid camera' or words to that effect. it would seem to me that this is posted partly to dissuade ne're do wells and partly to serve as an official notice that they are being recorded which could be used basically as a consent form to be video taped.

i 'spose that's enough beating on scrote a dead horse. i just hope the next time she plays text zombie her run in is with something mobile like maybe a city bus. she definitely needs to be culled from the herd.

[mvscal]

You'll notice in that definition no mention is made of financial gain

Yes, that's because it is an incomplete and inadequate definition.

it would seem anyone in the public can be video taped doing anything and put onto youtube with no reprecussions

No shit. Isn't that what I've been saying this whole time? She had no case and her ambulance chasers told her that. As scummy a twat as she is, you know that if there was so much as a free cup of coffee in it for her she would have sued in an instant.

[OCmike]

The definitive answer is that she has no case. The proof is that no lawyer will take it.

Jeezus, even Gloria Allred won't touch this. That should tell you all you need to know.

[mvscal]

Yes, that's because it is an incomplete and inadequate definition.

Go find a better one

You have already done so earlier.

[Bizzarofelice]

malls be broke. blood from turnip.