There was a first-of-its-kind lawsuit filed this week in Milwaukee County of lawyers fighting lawyers over an internet advertising dispute.
You can read the full story here, but basically, the plaintiffs claimed the defendants purchased the plaintiffs' names as keywords for internet advertising, without written consent. Therefore, the plaintiffs claim the defendants violated Wisconsin Statute 995.50 (2)(b) which says, "the use, for advertising purposes or purposes of trade, of the name... of any living person, without having first obtained the written consent of the person," is considered an invasion of privacy.
The defendants' purchase of the plaintiffs' names for advertising purposes is a clear-as-day violation of the statute. But after reading blogs, media stories, and readers' comments, I've noticed all of the commentary basically says the same thing: "It is aggravating for the plaintiffs, but legal in my opinion."
Hey, guess what? Your opinion doesn't matter!
The opinion that matters is that of the law. The question the court must answer is, "Did Defendants use, for advertising purposes, Plaintiffs' names without written consent?" The answer is an obvious yes.
The annoying and over-used personal opinion factor, rather than application to and interpretation of the law, leads me think about how many people apply their my-opinion-logic to their own decisions. Thank Goodness that as members of the Church, we have our own objective statutes and "laws," if you will. The "law" to guide our decision making is set forth by Christ himself, who gave the keys to the Kingdom to Peter instituting the Church, which, continues to give us authoritative moral guidance, standards, and "law," through the inspiration and cooperation of the Holy Spirit. Like it or not, it is what it is. Take it or leave it, folks.
Here's my point: It baffles me how so many Catholics choose the my-opinion-logic, rather than the Jesus-said-so logic, on moral decisions. It absolutely baffles me. That is all. Also, thank God for grace.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Annie, it's the law.
ReplyDeleteNOTHING is as cut-and-dried as you claim.
This case will turn on whether the actions constitute usage "for advertising purposes." Legally, the actions may not apply here.
All interpretation of law is opinion.
Exactly as I pointed out... the question the court needs to answer (which does seems rather cut and dry here). But regardless of what the court says, what's annoying is how everyone else has an opinion without knowing what the law says.
ReplyDeleteThanks for commenting!
Annie, You need a new post. It's been too long!
ReplyDelete