Wal-Mart is sued over rude lyrics

[WarlordMatt]

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/entertainment/4088757.stm

The parents of a 13-year-old girl are suing US supermarket giant Wal-Mart over a CD by rock group Evanescence that contains swear words.

The lawsuit, filed in Washington County, alleges Wal-Mart deceived customers by not putting warning labels on the cover.

Trevin Skeens alleges Wal-Mart knew of the offending word because it had censored it on its music sales website.

Wal-Mart said it was investigating the claims but had no plans to pull the CD.

Wal-Mart has a policy of not stocking CDs which carry parental advisory labels.

Mr Skeens said he bought the Anywhere But Home CD for his daughter and was shocked to hear the swearing when it was played in their car.

 

[ComradeDavo]

At 13 years old i'm sure the daughter can handle a few 'naughty' words

I find it crazy that someone would sue a shop over that. It is ridiculus.

 

[Bronx Warlord]

Little money grubbing @#$%^

 

[Syterion]

Just because it doesn't have parental advisory on it doesn't mean it won't swear.

And Evanescence isn't rock, it's goth-pop.

 

[pawpaw]

the cd's lacked warning labels. does show the parents have little idea of what their kids does--this is her favorite music but their never have heard it played?

 

[Fetus4188]

I though that was the record company's responsibility?




stupid parents..

 

[Speedo]

I thought WalMart only sold edited CDs anyway?

 

[cegman]

They do I am betting that there was some problem somewhere and that walmart recieved the unedited version accidentally. or mabye some guy thought it would be funny and sent them there without the label so they thought it was edited.

Oh yea money grubbing little... "Rock" group evanesce arrrgh... we don't need that angst in the world.

 

[warpstorm]

Add in the fact that he is suing for $74000 per cd sold in the state of Maryland (whether of not the buyers were offended) and you can see his true motivations. He's just trying to protect the children. His lawyer is planning on taking the case to all 50 states in addition to this one suit.

 

[storealex]

Walmart should sue the parents for being nuts!

 

[Perfection]

Man I better go buy an Evanescence CD...

 

[Civrules]

Yes, it's all about the money.

Some people abuse the freedoms they have... One little thing and BOOM! A lawsuit.

This actually reminds me of the event where somebody sued McDonalds for becoming too obese.

 

[storealex]

My question is: How is it possible to win such a case?

 

[SeleucusNicator]

Somebody should tell BBC that Wal-Mart isn't a supermarket chain.

 

[Civrules]

My question is: How is it possible to win such a case?

It is possible, because the system is designed this way, but more so, because the judge, and the court tend to believe what they hear from the people who want to sue.
If the judge just said, "You're doing this for the money; no normal human being would ever put a lawsuit for something like this," and ignores the whole case, guess what happens?

"Injustice."

 

[warpstorm]

There is a fair chance that a case like this won't come to court because it is easier (and cheaper) for Wal-Mart and BMG and Sony (the other defendants in this case) to give them a few hundred thousand to just go away and settle it out of court. This doesn't solve the problem that it is too easy to sue over anything in the USA.

 

[Toasty]

Always funny to see things like this.

I figure it's just a dangerous side-effect of doing the vast majority of your business i n the Southern United States .

 

[warpstorm]

Toasty, the suit is taking place in all of America. This is just the first one filed. In the article I read this morning, the lawyer is preparing cases for each state. Not one suit, but rather 50 individual ones (I actually don't know if Wal-Mart is in all 50 states). That way, if it gets thrown out in one jurisdiction, it still might get through in another. (To boot, Southerners do not consider Maryland to be the South, way too many yankee leanings.)

This is a case of false advertising, not censorship. Wal-Mart does advertise that they sell wholesome versions of all music. If I were them, I'd put a lot of fine print on my ads that says something like "Although we make efforts to ensure that our products are not offensive, we make no guarantees that a given individual will not find them offensive".

What does this mean to you? One of two things (or maybe both).

1. Harsher enforcement of warning labels and actual corporate censorship (not to be confused with governmental censorship).

2. Even higher prices as the corporations will need to ensure that they have enough cash to fend off law suits.

What you won't see (in my cynical opinion), more sensible laws.

 

[odintheking]

She's freakin thirteen! IT's not like she's never heard a cuss word before. The parents just want money.

 

[Xen]

Somebody should tell BBC that Wal-Mart isn't a supermarket chain.

wlamart owns both sams club, and ASDA, which are both essentially supermarkets- smas club could be considered an everything though, as they mass quantities of everythign they can get thier hands onto, cheaplly

however, the intoduction of walmarts that do function as supermarkets prompts th elabel anyway.

that said, I'm happy- the more done to pull down wal-mart, the better.