The Outhouse - The Greatest Comic Book Forum

by **GHERU** » Sun Apr 22, 2012 8:22 pm

Benderbrau wrote:I wonder about the legal implications of firing someone for exercising their first amendment rights.

free speech means the government can't tell your boss to fire you, not that a private company can't fire you for bad press

by **S.F. Jude Terror** » Sun Apr 22, 2012 8:23 pm

Benderbrau wrote:I wonder about the legal implications of firing someone for exercising their first amendment rights.

That's the new world we live in. Started with Imus.

by **GHERU** » Sun Apr 22, 2012 8:23 pm

Royal Nonesuch wrote:
If burning bridges is publicly lambasting DC on the way out, then that's what Grant Morrison must have back in 1999/2000. After all, he hasn't worked for DC since. Oh, wait...

its a totally different culture than it was 12 years ago, b itching on the internet then vs taking to your twitter account now draws a whole new level of attention and stock holder criticisms.

by **S.F. Jude Terror** » Sun Apr 22, 2012 8:24 pm

Corporations are people. What about their rights? Won't someone think of the corporations?

by **Victorian Squid** » Sun Apr 22, 2012 8:26 pm

S.F. Jude Terror wrote:
That's the new world we live in. Started with Imus.

I initially read that as "Started with Emus" and spent a good couple minutes trying to figure that one out.

by **Victorian Squid** » Sun Apr 22, 2012 8:28 pm

S.F. Jude Terror wrote:Corporations are people.

If only. Then we could make soylent green out of them.

by **GHERU** » Sun Apr 22, 2012 8:29 pm

S.F. Jude Terror wrote:
That's the new world we live in. Started with Imus.

no it didn't
people have been being fired for years for shitting on their bosses in public
If the Imus thing had been about free speech he would have been arrested for it, instated a private company decided they didn't like his speech on their time, the time they paid him for, and made a business decision.
same here

by **GHERU** » Sun Apr 22, 2012 8:30 pm

Ntikrst wrote:
Yes, if we define evil as the rationalized exploitation of others for personal gain

capitalism and contract law = bad

Ntikrst wrote:Oh mah gawd Becky! You are soo right. Some people, are like, soo immature.

yea, like those adults who sign contacts without reading them, putting into writing what they think is just, and bitching about all they money they made from said contact for over 20 years

by **GHERU** » Sun Apr 22, 2012 8:32 pm

S.F. Jude Terror wrote:Corporations are people. What about their rights? Won't someone think of the corporations?

isn't that why we have politicians?

by **Benderbrau** » Sun Apr 22, 2012 8:33 pm

GHERU wrote:no it didn't
people have been being fired for years for shitting on their bosses in public
If the Imus thing had been about free speech he would have been arrested for it, instated a private company decided they didn't like his speech on their time, the time they paid him for, and made a business decision.
same here

I think that in most cases that truth was usually only known to a few people within the company and to everyone else it was merely reasonable speculation. Most companies knew better then to openly state that they were firing someone for merely speaking their mind because they knew it could bring a shit storm of litigation.

by **Ntikrst** » Sun Apr 22, 2012 8:36 pm

GHERU wrote:yea, like those adults who sign contacts without reading them, putting into writing what they think is just, and bitching about all they money they made from said contact for over 20 years

Who signed a contract without reading it? Where did you get your information from and is it a reliable source without any conflict of interest?

It sounds very interesting.

by **ReturnoftheMack** » Sun Apr 22, 2012 8:38 pm

Ntikrst wrote:
Who signed a contract without reading it? Where did you get your information from and is it a reliable source without any conflict of interest?

It sounds very interesting.

Do you post on Bleeding Cool?

by **GHERU** » Sun Apr 22, 2012 8:40 pm

Benderbrau wrote:I think that in most cases that truth was usually only known to a few people within the company and to everyone else it was merely reasonable speculation. Most companies knew better then to openly state that they were firing someone for merely speaking their mind because they knew it could bring a shit storm of litigation.

check contracts, at-will employment, or whatever
if you went to the press tomorrow, and said who you were and who you worked for and started to bad mouth them, I'd bet you'd be out of a job pretty quick

just ask that Fox News guy who blogged for Gawker

by **Benderbrau** » Sun Apr 22, 2012 8:44 pm

GHERU wrote:check contracts, at-will employment, or whatever
if you went to the press tomorrow, and said who you were and who you worked for and started to bad mouth them, I'd bet you'd be out of a job pretty quick

just ask that Fox News guy who blogged for Gawker

In her capacity as a bank manager my wife could tell you that employment at will isn't as air tight as people think it is. There is still the risk of lawsuits whenever you fire someone regardless of state laws.

by **GHERU** » Sun Apr 22, 2012 8:44 pm

Ntikrst wrote:
Who signed a contract without reading it? Where did you get your information from and is it a reliable source without any conflict of interest?

It sounds very interesting.

hasn't Moore been saying for years that DC told him one thing about what OOP meant and then didn't hold to that, rather they acted on what was in the contract for Watchmen?

others in this thread keep telling me DC lied to Moore when they said Watchmen would stop being published after X amount of time, and he believed that, even though it wasn't in the contract. The contract that was so horrible he tried to get one just like it for his next DC project, Twilight of the Gods, a book about DCs big three - characters he bitches about current creators writing