SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
Niantic faces a class action lawsuit for encouraging trespassing on private property:
When Niantic released Pokemon Go, it randomly placed Pokémon, Pokéstops and Pokémon Gyms all over the world. Players of the game wander the real world and use smartphones to capture Pokemon, buy items and fight Pokemon Gym leaders.
"To create that immersive world, Niantic made unauthorized use of Plaintiff's and other Class members' property by placing Pokéstops and Pokémon gyms thereupon or nearby," said Jennifer Pafiti in the lawsuit. "In so doing, Niantic has encouraged Pokémon Go's millions of players to make unwanted incursions onto the properties of plaintiff, and other members of the class, a clear and ongoing invasion of their use and enjoyment of their land from which defendants have profited and continue to profit."
Due to the randomized placement of the Pokémon, Pokéstops and Pokémon Gyms, they have turned up in some unwanted locations such as in houses, cemeteries and museums. According to Jeffrey Marder, a man living in New Jersey, he received at least five unwelcome visitors that wanted access to his backyard to catch Pokémon within the first week of the game's launch.
"Plaintiff and other Class members have all suffered and will continue to suffer harm and damages as a result of Defendants' unlawful and wrongful conduct. A class action is superior to other available methods for the fair and efficient adjudication of this controversy," said Pafiti.
(Score: 5, Informative) by frojack on Wednesday August 03 2016, @06:05PM
Said unarmed kid ATTACKED neighborhood watch guy. Nice how you conveniently seem to forget that part when it doesn't fit your narrative.
No, you are mistaken. I've always had this sig.
(Score: 1) by Francis on Wednesday August 03 2016, @10:02PM
Said unarmed kid attacked somebody who was menacing him and wound up paying the price.
The whole thing would never have happened if that idiot watch person hadn't been up to no good. A firearm is not a replacement for a penis or proper common sense.
(Score: 1) by tftp on Thursday August 04 2016, @05:18AM
Said unarmed kid attacked somebody who was menacing him and wound up paying the price.
I wonder why was it that the neighborhood watch man was on the phone with 911 during the incident, but the "unarmed kid", scared out of his wits, if I get the message correctly, continued to talk to his GF all the way until he decided to attack someone who, for all intents and purposes, was just exercising his freedom to walk wherever he wants, just like the kid himself?
For example: both you and I are free to walk in a forest (say, a BLM forest, to be clear.) I follow you everywhere, trailing you by 10 yards. Will you attack me? Note that I have no obligation to even acknowledge your existence, unless you are a credentialed LEO. What would be the right thing to do, outside of [rightfully] declaring the stalker a class A hole? Would calling police be one of the options? Would pointing a gun at the follower be an option? If you shoot, what would be your explanation why you shot and killed an unarmed kid who was just looking at the squirrel?