Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

LucyRiversinker t1_j5wx7yo wrote

Reply to comment by aphasial in NY AG wants answers on Madison Square Garden's use of facial recognition against legal opponents by Sorin61

The lawyers are not the plaintiffs. They are officers of the court.

51

Trygolds t1_j5xkwkn wrote

They are also not a protected class.

−22

ukezi t1_j5xro9i wrote

However for instance their alcohol licence requires them to admit members of the public and enumerates the reason they can bar entry. Being an employee in a firm that is representing someone that is suing us is obviously not on the list.

12

Trygolds t1_j5y7vth wrote

Than revoke the license based on that. A ruling that would make lawyers a protected class is froth with pitfalls.

I get in this case they are a big venue but I live in a small town and lets face it regardless of the lawyers just doing their jobs I can see someone not wanting to have a lawyer suing them as a patron.

We have seen in many cases lawyers exhibiting unethical legal behavior and how reluctant the bar is to sanction them

2

ukezi t1_j5y9033 wrote

I don't think this is about them becoming a protected class. This is about retaliation being illegal, especially a blanket ban this wide. At least after they bought a ticket. I imagine the discussion would be different if they didn't sell a ticket in the first place.

The sale of a ticket is a contract and one should expect that the contract will not be broken without good reason.

5

aphasial t1_j5x27ii wrote

Exactly. Even more potential cause.

−55

CadeMan011 t1_j5xfh4n wrote

Either you're trolling or you genuinely don't understand.

The people suing them aren't being turned away from events, employees of a very big law firm representing one client that is suing them are being turned away.

18

aphasial t1_j5zj8oz wrote

This isn't a troll -- in fact I'm not certain the rest of you aren't trolling (with the caveat that: https://www.reddit.com/r/technology/comments/10l7d41/comment/j5xdf1b/?utm_source=reddit&utm_medium=web2x&context=3 , which as someone not living in New York, I can't speak to)

Other than that (i.e., elsewhere), so long as discrimination isn't happening involving a Protected Class, venues can kick out or block entry to whomever they want. A venue (though maybe not in NY) has the right to refuse service to anyone if they so choose and that's that. Elsewhere there would be no legal question at all here.

−1

LucyRiversinker t1_j60u4d2 wrote

I wouldn’t have a problem with your reasoning if the plaintiffs were barred from entering the premises. I certainly wouldn’t work for you if you sued me. But the lawyers are doing their job. Yes, the people at MSG have a right because lawyers and employees are not a protected class. But they are the wrong target, if MSG wants to hurt its “enemies.” So we are not arguing the legality itself, but the consequences of this sort of attitude. I hate the slippery-slope fallacy, bit when does it end? Want to ban the lawyer of record? Ok. She or he directly benefits from the success of the lawsuit. The paralegal. O….k? The secretary? I am not so sure. IT department? The mailroom staff? Office maintenance staff? The cleaners? When is revenge enough?

1

aphasial t1_j60vol2 wrote

I mean, I agree that there's plenty to talk about here when it comes to whether this is a good idea, or fair.

But plenty of people in this and similar threads are arguing around legality and rights of entry. And while that NY liquor law is interesting, I get the impression most of those arguing as such are simply suffering from the collective, seemingly-generation-wide illusion that discrimination not involving protected classes is somehow illegal.

2

LucyRiversinker t1_j60y7js wrote

Agreed. Nobody is per se entitled to attend an event at MSG, or have a Twitter account, or have their own tv station carried by DirectTV (NewsMax is being dropped). This is just stupid vindictive. There is no benefit to MSG.

2

tehtinman t1_j5xvxn1 wrote

Why can’t the accounting guy for the the law firm just watch the Knicks lose in-person in peace?

5