Comments
RangeWilson t1_j18br10 wrote
They should sue!
[deleted] t1_j15s5jx wrote
[deleted]
TechNickL t1_j16w1kx wrote
That's all kinds of not how any of this works
[deleted] t1_j16w87q wrote
[deleted]
Novadale t1_j16wqcu wrote
The people who were denied access were not involved in the lawsuit they just worked for the same company. It would be like being denied access to Wendy's because you worked at mcdonald's.
[deleted] t1_j16zhut wrote
[deleted]
brickmaster32000 t1_j170gtn wrote
It's not different, your previous experience should have also been considered unacceptable.
TechNickL t1_j17258q wrote
What you're describing is already unacceptable. It's needlessly petty at best.
Besides, it's also different. This case is more like Pepsi refusing to sell to someone who once worked for an advertising firm that made a commercial for Coke. The person affected is not a Pepsi employee, nor have they done anything except their job. And that's still disregarding how weird/disturbing it is that MSG apparently has access to the facial recognition data to bar anyone working at specific companies and is allowed to use it at will.
Skankcunt420 t1_j17kg79 wrote
This isn’t personal property, it’s commercial.
FerdyDurkke t1_j18i2hp wrote
It’s private property. You can legally be ejected by agents working under authority of the owner of the property for any reason short of discrimination based on race, religion, etc. If the property owner doesn’t like your face they need no other reason to have you booted.
drfunkenstien014 t1_j18pru5 wrote
It’s all James Dolan, the man who owns MSG and the teams that play there. He is notoriously petty, and this is exactly the kinda shit he’s known for doing