posted on September 27, 2001 10:48:06 AM new
The new "rules" concerning Sept. 11 have got to make even the most passive person angry and confused. First, the ban on Sept 11 items and World Trade Center items is extended through the Christmas season. You would think from this policy that eBay might be trying to soothe the nation's shock. WRONG!! You are allowed to sell WTC items IF you sell them through the Auctions for America so that eBay can donate your money and take credit for the charitable work.
Add this to eBay examining auction write ups and cancelling auctions if they feel that "someone may take offense" to the description. Case in point -- I listed a George W Bush item four days ago and had the "nerve" to actually say something negative about Baby Bush. eBay pulled the auction. Look, I didn't vote for the guy in November, and I still don't think he is the right man for the job. Just because we have had tradegy does NOT mean that I have to fall in love with a drug using exectutor. And eBay should not have the right to cancel an auction just because a statement in the write up does not go along with their political policy.
The last time I looked out the window and saw numerous flags on building and cars, I thought I was in America. What ever happened to free speech? Free enterprise? eBay has really gotten a black eye over the handling of our nation's tradegy.
posted on September 27, 2001 10:53:46 AM new
Well, I hate to tell you this, but the first ammendment does not guarantee you the right to make a political statement whenever and wherever you want. Ebay is a business, where you agreed to abide by their rules (and I am sure somewhere it says they can do this) and I support their right to edit or remove something they consider offensive. Now, if you were at city hall, and had a protest sign against the president, and were arrested by the police, then I would be with you 100% - That is ABSOLUTELY unconstitutional, but if Ebay does not have the right to end your auction, then that means they do not have the right to end an auction of someone selling a Bin Laden Rules T-Shirt. Sorry, I am with Ebay on this one.
posted on September 27, 2001 12:51:34 PM new
But eBay is only a "public venue". Do they have the right of censorship? If they are only a "public venue" they should have no control over what is sold unless it is specifically illegal or a copyrighted work. Offensive material the is legal to sell is none of their business. It is the choice that is made when the claimed "venue." Sooner or later, our gutless courts are going to wake up to the fact that the control that eBay exercises over auctions make it no longer a venue.
posted on September 27, 2001 01:10:50 PM new
They aren't a public venue though, they are a private business. I think you are confusing that because they are listed on stock exchanges and invite people to invest in them, this does not make them a public venue. This is a private business that invites others to become part (be it very small) owners of this business.
Offensive material is totally their business, because if Ebay became the place for a lot of offensive stuff, like nazi material, it would really hurt their business.
Ever see a sign at a restaurant like McDonald's that says we reserve the right to refuse service? Now, if it were your local social security office refusing you, you would have a legitimate gripe, but McDonald's can serve or not serve whoever they want to.
posted on September 27, 2001 02:20:16 PM new
Sorry, the lunch counter analogy does not hold here. Just because they allowed the protests to go on does not mean they were obligated to. It could have come to an end at any time. Now, protesting the policy is of course allowed, they could have picketed outside the restaurant and there is really nothing that legally could have been done to them. However, protesting ON the property of the restaurant certainly is not allowed if the owners don't permit you to be there...
This person who was protesting the president can do so, but Ebay has the right not to allow it on their property, which is their web site.
posted on September 27, 2001 05:29:34 PM new
I don't know why you would make a negative comment about George W. if you are selling an item of or relating to him. Any viewer of the auction probably voted for him. Why would you want to make your buyers angry?
posted on October 5, 2001 12:53:07 PM new
A retail store is private property. At any time you can decide a person is trespassing and have them removed.
Of course, that does not mean that I do not agree with what happened at the lunch counter.
posted on October 5, 2001 12:58:01 PM new
Not exactly...
A retail store is open to the public and must be available to ALL of the public or NONE!
In order to remove someone ya must prove you are doing it for safety or something...not JUST BECAUSE YA DON'T LIKE THEIR SKIN COLOR OR SEX!
THAT was the whole logic behind the sit-in's of the 1960's! Private property is not PRIVATE if ya want to be open to the PUBLIC -- you cannot EXCLUDE anyone just by claiming PROPERTY RIGHTS!
I was knocked over the head & gassed enough in the '60s to have learned SOMETHING!
posted on October 5, 2001 01:07:14 PM new
Yes exactly! Ever walk into a place of business that says:
WE RESERVE THE RIGHT TO REFUSE SERVICE TO ANYONE
or
NO SHOES, NO SHIRT, NO SERVICE
A private business has the right to cater to ANYONE they want to and exclude ANYONE they want to. How do you explain women only gyms? How about a policy that excludes minors? You don't have to prove that you feel unsafe! That is ridiculous. How can you prove or not prove that someone felt threatened. As a private business owner, you can basically do what you want in this regard. Now, if you operate with some public assistance in ANY WAY, then you might find yourself in a different situation. That is not at play in this conversation though.
posted on October 5, 2001 01:22:04 PM new
One thing about this conversation: I am STRONGLY against businesses that might discriminate against anyone based on race, religion, gender, etc. I (and the vast majority) of people out there feel it is wrong.
That being said, I feel there is a lot of government interference in our lives, and if they come into our businesses, who knows what is next. I don't want to go down that road.
posted on October 5, 2001 03:11:58 PM new
ebay says they are a venue,not "public venue" a venue to sell stuff. Your local newspaper reserves the right to refuse classified ads they fell are unacceptable, and so does ebay.
I don't know what you said about the pres, but it probably wasn't worth ending your auction over.
Can you tell us what you wrote, if it isn't against the rules here?
posted on October 5, 2001 03:14:42 PM new
A retail store can have you removed, believe me I've had it done to me before. I was a disruption apearantly
[ edited by glasshappy on Oct 5, 2001 03:15 PM ]
posted on October 5, 2001 08:37:43 PM new
You don't have the right to walk into a store and hang a sign in the window without the permission of the management.
If you did, the management would have every right to remove the sign. If you persisted in trying to post a sign in the window they have the right to call the police and have you removed.
Ebay is providing you with a window and they have a right to specify what you can "hang" in it.
If on the otherhand, you were to walk into a store wearing a political button and the management asked you to remove the button or leave the store--THAT would be a violation of your First Amendment rights.
The First Amendment gives you the right to express your views. It doesn't give you the right to force others to help you promote your views.
posted on October 5, 2001 08:47:45 PM new
You are wrong though, you can be asked to leave by having a button, it is not what the first ammendment is all about. What if someone walked into a privately owned kosher butcher shop wearing a button that says Hitler Rules. That's a first ammendment statement, does the business have to serve you? NO!!! The first ammendment protects ALL speech, not just political statements. However, it does have limitations, and can not infringe on individuals on their property. That includes a private business. Now, if the person walked into a state office, like the DMV wearing that button, and they were refused service, Then you have a problem there, because even though I would detest anyone wearing that button, I support their right to wear it. You just don't have to allow them onto your property (or business) because of that or anything really
posted on October 6, 2001 06:49:55 AM new
---Yes exactly! Ever walk into a place of business that says:
WE RESERVE THE RIGHT TO REFUSE SERVICE TO ANYONE
or
NO SHOES, NO SHIRT, NO SERVICE
A private business has the right to cater to ANYONE they want to and exclude ANYONE they want to. ---
I am sometimes AMAZED at what is posted on this board. So a business can put a sign up, and that sign has the force of law??? It would behoove anyone who even suspects that the above totally-false ridiculousness may be true to familiarize themselves with the concept of "LAW," both State and Federal, and to understand that a business can put any durn sign they so desire up, IT DOESN'T CARRY THE FORCE OF OR SUPERCEDE ***THE LAW***.
posted on October 6, 2001 07:17:40 AM new
YIKES, Tom, I mean, it's bad enough that someone can post err silliness like that, but it boggles my mind that they can actually believe it.
Like, did nobody read about the hotwater that airline is in (??United) for EXCLUDING some Middle Eastern "Appearing" passengers from a flight because the other passengers on-board didn't want "those types' on the same plane? The DOJ is considering prosecution!
posted on October 6, 2001 08:41:58 AM new
I think people are confusing certain employment laws that do not allow for discrimination against race, religion, gender...This has been legislated and is the law. However, a private business can still decide to remove anyone from their premises if they wish to, and you can no be hired because of things like you have long hair, you have an earring, they don't like the color of your eyes, you weight too much, etc.
posted on October 6, 2001 08:59:14 AM new
People are confusing nothing, and a private business CAN'T remove anyone who they want just because they want to. You seem to be aware of LAWS against discrimination by race or religion- do you think a private business can remove anyone who is say Black because they want to remove them for that reason? Or remove someone wearing a Jewish star? Um, NO. You think that if they put a sign in their window that no Blacks, women, people over 6'5" or under 4'5" will be served, that that isn't against the law? Think again, they'd lose their business license in a FLASH. And as far as your examples about a business being able to hire and/or fire anyone they want for any reason they want- um again NO. The weight example (whatever you think of it) has been adjudicated many times in Courts. There are LAWS that govern discrimination in hiring, firing, etc. Specific Federal AND State laws. Whether you like them or not, maybe you should do some reading and research, and try to understand first that they exist, and then what they are.
posted on October 6, 2001 11:20:27 AM new
ok then, tell me why the Supreme Court (of the United States) has allowed the Boy Scout's policy of restricting homosexual scout leaders to stand? Why don't you review that case, and then get back to us here. It pretty much sums up the argument.
There are protected classes of discrimination for hiring and firing. If you wish to view them, go to the EEOC website at:
http://www.eeoc.gov/facts/qanda.html
Tell me where it says weight is protected. You can be fired because you have green eyes, but you can't be fired because of a disability. Strange, but true.
posted on October 6, 2001 11:39:23 AM new
You're grossly wrong, I don't know what you're arguing about, I've been the advocate in 5 employment cases, all of which I've won, you're way out of your depth...
There have been quite a few cases in State Courts where a company has alleged poor performance, no qualifications, or other such excuses, when it's been shown that the true cause of the firing or the lack of hiring was simply sex, age, weight, looks, etc., and it has been determined by the court that some contract exists, implied or actual. And the Plaintiffs have had a good amount of success in winning them. That's STATE Civil Law, aside from the EEOC. The EEOC, FTC, etc., are FEDERAL entities making Federal Law. Noone said weight was a "protected class" under FEDERAL law, and the term "protected class" doesn't apply. People and classes thereof are protected under ALL applicable laws, State and Federal, including contract law.
If you still think your below statement is correct-
---A private business has the right to cater to ANYONE they want to and exclude ANYONE they want to.---
review Federal Law like the ADA, and applicable civil rights acts, anti-segregation, etc. The statement is GROSSLY incorrect.
posted on October 6, 2001 04:04:10 PM new
I am sick of this argument as well, but I will point out that you have failed to respond to the two examples I listed earlier, about the Boy Scouts (which went to the Supreme Court) and Women only gyms. If federal law worked as you proposed it does, how could these two things exist? The answer is that it can't. I won't respond to any more posts on this subject, I've made my point.
For anyone who is truly interested, read the Boy Scouts decision, understand that BSA is NOT a private business, and that the decision OBVIOUSLY has nothing to do with the absurd contentions made on this thread...
posted on October 6, 2001 09:44:33 PM newgreedbay - You seem to think that there are no exceptions to the laws you believe exist.
As far as I know, Hooters restaurants are still getting away with hiring only slim, big-breasted women to wait on their tables. They were questioned on it before and get away with it stating that they are a "themed" restaurant and hire women that only have their required (what they call) "Girl-next-door" looks. So, if you're an overweight female, forget about bothering to apply for a waitress job there...
You might not want to think there are, but there are exceptions, believe me...
