quote:

US 'sex addict' sues over firing By Jeremy Cooke BBC News, New York The internet provided psychological comfort, Mr Pacenza says. A man in the US is suing IBM for $5m in a wrongful dismissal case after he was fired for visiting adult internet chat rooms while at work. James Pacenza, 58, says he was addicted to online chat rooms and that IBM should have offered him sympathy and treatment instead of firing him. The Vietnam War veteran says he has suffered from post-traumatic stress disorder since 1969. He argues that he used the internet to control his psychological problems. 'Self-medicating' Mr Pacenza says that seeing his best friend killed in action while they were on patrol in Vietnam in 1969 brought on his post-traumatic stress disorder. He says that his psychological problems have left him addicted to sex, especially adult internet chat rooms. When a fellow employee at IBM told managers that Mr Pacenza was visiting such sites while at work, he was fired. The stated reason was that he visited an internet chat site for a sexual experience after he had previously been warned. James Pacenza's lawyers will argue in court that their client was using the internet to self-medicate as a way of controlling his post traumatic stress disorder. They will also argue that Mr Pacenza's claimed addiction to adult internet sites should be treated in the same way as other employees' addictions to drugs or alcohol. The case has potential implications for employers across America and their attitude towards regulating how their employees use workplace computers.

Can't believe that this kind of stupidity exists in this world!!!

Next time somebody can say I need to mastrubate on naked chicks at work to treat my fever!!!!

Last edited by star-traveller on May-25-2007 at 12:25

Scumbags sue over anything nowadays.

___________________
. . .. . .. . . . .. . .

This is worth taking notice only if the court awards the sex addict his due compensation.

There is no way this guy will get a judgement in his favor; IBM is on very solid ground because their policy is based on the sexual harassment precedents.

quote:

Originally posted by spiflicated There is no way this guy will get a judgement in his favor; IBM is on very solid ground because their policy is based on the sexual harassment precedents.

Never underestimate the united states judicial system.

Hope he doesn't win. It'll open the floodgates otherwise.

___________________

quote:

Originally posted by DJ Mikey Mike Social outcasts are often of the opinion that they must have a drink before being able to loosen up with their inhibitions, thus being able to have a good time. There's a word that sums up this sort of behaviour, and that word is 'reject.'

lol

___________________
"The Greatest enemy of knowledge is not ignorance, it is the illusion of knowledge." -Stephen Hawking
"First they came for the communists, and I did not speak out— because I was not a communist;
Then they came for the socialists, and I did not speak out— because I was not a socialist;
Then they came for the trade unionists, and I did not speak out— because I was not a trade unionist;
Then they came for the Jews, and I did not speak out— because I was not a Jew;
Then they came for me— and there was no one left to speak out for me." -Martin Niemöller

Wanker

___________________
Indiana Clones Upcoming Sets
[ I May Upload Something Someday ]

quote:

Originally posted by jonSun Scumbags sue over anything nowadays.

poeple in the US sue over anything...

___________________

quote:

Originally posted by Halcyon+On+On OOKA-OOKA ME NACHOS ME PRESS KEYS ON COMPUTER GOOD

Yeah, here's a perfect example of how sue-happy America is.

LINK

In summary:

A St. Louis Cardinals pitcher gets drunk, drives, and then proceeds to ram his SUV into the back of a tow truck that was stopped to help a disabled car, killing the pitcher.

So...was it his fault, since he drove drunk and then rammed his car into the back of a tow truck?

No. The family is suing:

1. The bar where the pitcher was drinking that night
2. The driver of the tow truck and and tow truck company
3. The owner of the disabled car that the tow truck was helping

In other words, the family believes that the fault of the accident is in the bar, because that's where he got drunk, and the tow truck and disabled car, because if they weren't there, he wouldn't have slammed his car into them, killing himself.

It's absolutely ridiculous. Gotta love it.

there are a whole bunch of websites listing stupid lawsuits. Here's one.

Clicky

quote:

A Montana man has sued media giant Viacom, saying the MTV show "Jackass" plagiarized his name, infringed on the trademark and copyright o his name and defamed his good character. The plaintiff's name is Jack Ass. That's right, that is now his legal name. He changed his name from Bob Craft to Jack Ass in 1997, he says, in order to raise awareness about the dangers of drunken driving. "Jackass," which premiered on MTV in 2000, features a group of guys performing ludicrous and sometimes dangerous stunts. It was made into a movie in 2002. In the suit against Viacom, which owns MTV, Jack Ass claims the conglomerate "is liable for injury to my reputation that I have built and defamation of my character which I have worked so hard to create." This Jack Ass, not to be confused with the TV version, says he changed his name after his brother and a friend were killed in a single-vehicle car accident several years ago. He now works to promote responsible choices and designated-driver programs. He claims that "Jackass" committed "trademark and copyright infringement on my legal name" and on a cartoon character, called Andi Ass, that he created to help spread his message. He's seeking at least $10 million in damages.

quote:

Originally posted by NeoPhono Yeah, here's a perfect example of how sue-happy America is. LINK In summary: A St. Louis Cardinals pitcher gets drunk, drives, and then proceeds to ram his SUV into the back of a tow truck that was stopped to help a disabled car, killing the pitcher. So...was it his fault, since he drove drunk and then rammed his car into the back of a tow truck? No. The family is suing: 1. The bar where the pitcher was drinking that night 2. The driver of the tow truck and and tow truck company 3. The owner of the disabled car that the tow truck was helping In other words, the family believes that the fault of the accident is in the bar, because that's where he got drunk, and the tow truck and disabled car, because if they weren't there, he wouldn't have slammed his car into them, killing himself. It's absolutely ridiculous. Gotta love it.

the family should sue itself becuase it wasn't for his momma and his daddy having hime, he never would have been killed. oh noessss.

seriously tho, they may have a case against the bar for serving him too much, and the truck and the other driver if they weren't parked correctly on the side of the road.

___________________
UnauthorizedTranceAddict Youtube Channel where I post older mixes from the TA DJ Promotion Forum

My mixes:

Still up:1:2

Down:3:4:5