huppakee

O lol, not on purpose - i just suck at math

So ~~60~~ 50 years is 600%? That's crazy

Over here:

A) you have a legal right to legal representation, there is a social justice system where lawyers work for a set price.
B) if you bring something to court, you have to pay a few, also if the case gets dismissed.
C) Not bringing a lawyer does not automatically mean someone is in contempt of court.

And i believe there is some law here where you got be charged for a crime if you harras people, i think this would be triggered after your third or fourth frivolous suit.

Poor people are fucked over all the time, but over here not because they're sued by someone with money for no reason.

100% agree

For individuals it is a lot easier to go to another country to evade punishment. If a company does that they also can't produce or sell there themselves and will have to find another company to act as an intermediary. Also, in this case it is about a dragging someone to court. It is hard to take a us software company to court, but it does happen. For example, a Dutch organisation took Meta to court for not allowing users to receive a feed with only the accounts they follow. They won that case. A celeb had his identity used by fraudsters who used Google Ads to trick people into buying certain crypto, he won the case. Yes companies get away with a lot, but they are 'made to obey local laws' from time to time.

I'm confused, even if the girl could waive her rights and that is legally a valid argument - she is not the one who's excersizing her right to sue the company right? Does that right extend beyond death or would such a contract also extend to others who have not signed anything?

Also what the fuck, their stance is they can't be sued, instead of they're not guilty. I mean i'm not guilty and the parents can't sue me, but if they wanted to my defense would surely be that i had nothing to do with it - not that they can't sue me.

Relevant yes, but isn't the age at which she signed the 'contract' even more relevant? Crazy young age to end your life though. Can't imagine what that's like.

I think it depends on the country, since all rights themself are granted by the law of a country. That's why there is a global definition of what human right, but not every human gets to exercise that right.

Not a lawyer, but if i hire someone to kill someone and put that in writing, I can't sue that person for not doing his job because the contract has no legal value. Not sure on the details, but if i understand correctly a contract between two people cannot cover things that are outside the law. Meaning the law of contracts (like TOS) is inferior to the law of killing people. Seems like this is not true for America, but here i've heard of consumers winning lawsuits based on this principle.

We do need global punishment for corporations, but it would not be the only solution: corporation have to abide to local laws.

Jokes on you, i don't read lorum ipsum

The market for regular food was completely saturated before fast food and highly processed food entered that market. The shittiest chefs weren't outcompeted by the best chefs. The market for regular food shrank a little perhaps, but the total market might have tripled in size. No one had expected back then that a) people would get this fat on average and b) that there would be this many people alive. I agree with your conclusion but it's naive to believe you see the future because you understand the past.

Afaik they got tired of winning, and want their users to use Lemmy instead.