Will I admire Mark Rober going after scammers, I have to point out, that Glitter, is one of those plastic pollutants that is contributing to the global tsunami of plastic pollution and microplastics ... which we now find inside our blood.
I've mentioned this to people that know Mark personally but it seems I am the odd one out. I think it's cool that he takes on the legal liability risk of going after thieves and scammers but it's just a matter of time before one of the glitter bombs goes off in a car, causes the thief to drive into oncoming traffic or a pedestrian and he gets sued into oblivion for causing loss of life even if indirectly. The local cops fully support him but that will not protect him from civil damages. I know he reviews this with lawyers but I've experienced first hand that lawyers don't always consider the best interests of their clients.
Anyone can sue anyone for anything in America. If Mark has consulted with counsel (as well as hopefully has his assets titled/structured in a way to shield them, and a PLUP/umbrella liability policy in place as part of his business venture), it seems this is within his risk tolerance.
YouTube channel "LegalEagle" did a discussion contrasting two Florida women being charged with felonies for throwing a glitter bomb vs Mark Rober's glitter bomb pranks:
He's protected from civil lawsuits by something else: If you want to sue someone, you more or less have to show up in court and identify yourself. At least if the party you are suing wants you to show up in court.
Do you think that, for example, the CEOs of those three companies would want to travel to a jurisdiction where they have many victims and tell Mark a precise time and place where they might be arrested?
8 comments
[ 3.0 ms ] story [ 33.3 ms ] threadhttps://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2020/oct/22/glitte...
What I would really like is for Mark to stop with the glitter bombs. We have enough plastic already everywhere.
But cudos to bringing down the scammers in India.
He didn't invite anyone to take it and open it.
Why would his lawyers risk disbarment by violating their fiduciary duty for... no benefit?
He specifically put it on porches with the explicit intent of having it get stolen. That's pretty close to an invitation.
Intent matters to the law. Laws are not a set of rules blindly applied like many of us have come to expect from computers.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QRSHeKgMFlo
Do you think that, for example, the CEOs of those three companies would want to travel to a jurisdiction where they have many victims and tell Mark a precise time and place where they might be arrested?