Do you have adblock enabled?
If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Ottawa Citizen)   What do you do when truth in advertising laws mean you can't lie about your product? Tell the Supreme Court that a ban on lying is a violation of your right to free speech   (ottawacitizen.com) divider line 126
    More: Asinine, Competition Act, Rogers Communications, Advertising regulation, Ontario Superior Court, false advertising, Bell Canada, product innovations, free speech  
•       •       •

17905 clicks; posted to Main » on 07 Aug 2012 at 4:19 PM (2 years ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



126 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | » | Last | Show all
 
2012-08-07 02:30:20 PM  
Interesting.
 
2012-08-07 02:33:09 PM  
I had no idea the Oligarchy was so outspoken in Canada.
 
2012-08-07 02:34:28 PM  
It worked for Fox News
 
2012-08-07 02:34:29 PM  
Good thing it's Canada. If this were in the US, next year we'd have ads saying Viagra is known to reduce cancer in 99% of clinical trials.

/Because free speech is above all, at least when it comes to the ability of a corporation to abuse it
 
2012-08-07 02:45:45 PM  
Rogers is the absolute worst.
 
2012-08-07 02:54:06 PM  
The Conservatives tried to dismantle our laws that prevented news agencies from publishing lies so that Sun TV could go full DERP legally. I wonder if this will be a back door way for that to get passed. If Rogers is able to pass off lies about its products as "protected free speech" then Sun TV will be able to pass off lies about current events as "protected free speech".
 
2012-08-07 03:09:49 PM  

Elandriel: Good thing it's Canada. If this were in the US, next year we'd have ads saying Viagra is known to reduce cancer in 99% of clinical trials.


And the Apple Siri sucks off Ben Alleck and brings him to climax. And then lets him know whether it's raining or not.
 
2012-08-07 03:11:18 PM  
I'm in advertising and these clowns disgust me.
 
2012-08-07 03:47:57 PM  
I didn't read the article because it was in Canadian, and I am not a lawyer, but isn't this similar to Nike's claims in Kasky v. Nike?
 
2012-08-07 04:21:35 PM  

MaudlinMutantMollusk: It worked for Fox News


Came to say THIS.
 
2012-08-07 04:22:12 PM  
This should not even be up for debate.

A person has rights only up to the point where they infringe on the rights of others.

To oversimplify: Free speech is a fine right. But others have the right not to be stolen from. Disingenuous claims by advertising is effectively theft. You have now infringed on another's right; your right of free speech has met it's boundry.
 
2012-08-07 04:22:38 PM  
Corporations have the right to freedom of expression? I thought you were smarter than that, Canada.
 
2012-08-07 04:23:09 PM  

Mugato: Elandriel: Good thing it's Canada. If this were in the US, next year we'd have ads saying Viagra is known to reduce cancer in 99% of clinical trials.

And the Apple Siri sucks off Ben Alleck and brings him to climax. And then lets him know whether it's raining or not.


That was Katy Perry that she let know if it was raining.
 
2012-08-07 04:24:46 PM  
As long as I can tell chicks in bars I'm a Doctor to get tail, it's all good.

/Sure, I'll take a look at that for you.
 
2012-08-07 04:25:29 PM  
I assumed this was going to be about POM Wonderful.
 
2012-08-07 04:25:42 PM  

abfalter: This should not even be up for debate.

A person has rights only up to the point where they infringe on the rights of others.

To oversimplify: Free speech is a fine right. But others have the right not to be stolen from. Disingenuous claims by advertising is effectively theft. You have now infringed on another's right; your right of free speech has met it's boundry.


That's why you sue in civil courts.
 
2012-08-07 04:27:02 PM  

Elandriel: Good thing it's Canada. If this were in the US, next year we'd have ads saying Viagra is known to reduce cancer in 99% of clinical trials.

/Because free speech is above all, at least when it comes to the ability of a corporation to abuse it


It already gives you a boner. You could tell people it gives them cancer and they'll still buy it.
 
2012-08-07 04:27:11 PM  
Rogers will ask the Ontario Superior Court to strike down a key provision in the federal law requiring companies to have "adequate and proper" tests of a product's performance before making performance claims in advertisements. Rogers says this testing requirement violates its right to freedom of expression enshrined in Canada's Charter of Rights and Freedoms.

Okay, I thought subby was kidding. I guess besides being a Congressional Medal of Honor winning Navy SEAL I can tell people about my new cell phone that works via satellite. This will replace the wearing of denim pants, shirts and jackets as the definition of "going full Canadian."
 
2012-08-07 04:29:34 PM  
From the same corporation that tried "negative billing"? Colour me shocked - with an extra `u' in colour!
 
2012-08-07 04:29:47 PM  
If Rogers is successful, I say take out adds detailing how the CEO of Rogers is a child molester and rapes sheep.
 
2012-08-07 04:31:53 PM  

abfalter: This should not even be up for debate.

A person has rights only up to the point where they infringe on the rights of others.

To oversimplify: Free speech is a fine right. But others have the right not to be stolen from. Disingenuous claims by advertising is effectively theft. You have now infringed on another's right; your right of free speech has met it's boundry.


No, it's not theft. If I claim my product, which is a rock I picked up from my back lawn, cures cancer I have not committed theft in any way, shape, or form. I have definitely lied, but not committed theft. If you buy it to cure your cancer and it fails, then sue me for damages. Maybe you can make a case for theft then.
 
2012-08-07 04:32:55 PM  

Mugato: Elandriel: Good thing it's Canada. If this were in the US, next year we'd have ads saying Viagra is known to reduce cancer in 99% of clinical trials.

And the Apple Siri sucks off Ben Alleck and brings him to climax. And then lets him know whether it's raining or not.


My new product is an armband that was proven in clinical trials to use the magnetic chi of the world to cure diseases and allow for superior psychic reception, allowing users to make better stock market choices, increasing their portfolios, on average, by a startling 112%. The Healther is so effective, it can actually make people the user was in regular contact with better as well, showing that 7% of users had their mothers' cured of emphysema and two cases of Alzheimers--though it would be best to buy them one of their own.

The Healther is made from an unknown metal found in the Roswell desert shortly after the mysterious UFO sightings and possible crash. Until recently, it couldn't be altered by any method known to man, however our patented 'ACID-LASER' technology fueled by manipulation of the recently discovered Higgs Boson in Europe means we've been able to harness the powers of the Cosmos.

I bring you, ladies and gentlemen, the greatest invention ever:

The Healther.
Quantum physics says it has a probability to do anything you want. Anything.

Be a God: Buy the HEALTHER now!
 
2012-08-07 04:33:16 PM  

Elandriel: Good thing it's Canada. If this were in the US, next year we'd have ads saying Viagra is known to reduce cancer in 99% of clinical trials.

/Because free speech is above all, at least when it comes to the ability of a corporation to abuse it


It's free speech until people start dying and lawyering up.

/Yaz!
 
2012-08-07 04:34:40 PM  
The Ontario Superior Court of Justice is not the Supreme Court of Canada.
 
2012-08-07 04:34:52 PM  

MaudlinMutantMollusk: It worked for Fox News


Difference is that Fox News isn't advertising a product. Censoring free speech for television news networks is a very slippery slope (who decides what is truth?). Censoring free speech in advertisement is way, way different.
 
2012-08-07 04:34:52 PM  

MaudlinMutantMollusk: It worked for Fox News


And, we're done.
 
2012-08-07 04:36:49 PM  
oh Can na da. you land of sim ple tons.
 
2012-08-07 04:36:55 PM  

Psychohazard: I assumed this was going to be about POM Wonderful.


Or homeopathy.
 
2012-08-07 04:36:56 PM  

MugzyBrown: abfalter: This should not even be up for debate.

A person has rights only up to the point where they infringe on the rights of others.

To oversimplify: Free speech is a fine right. But others have the right not to be stolen from. Disingenuous claims by advertising is effectively theft. You have now infringed on another's right; your right of free speech has met it's boundry.

That's why you sue in civil courts.


Assuming one has the money to hire a lawyer to combat a corporation, you'd still bog down the courts with lawsuits that would have been avoided if we'd just said "No, you can't lie in advertising". Consumer protection isn't just the redress of wrongs, it's the prevention as well.
 
2012-08-07 04:37:25 PM  
Fraud is protected speech.

/not really
 
2012-08-07 04:37:36 PM  

Milos Hattrick: The Ontario Superior Court of Justice is not the Supreme Court of Canada.


We're calling ourselves "Upper Canada" again - just to piss-off Quebec.
 
2012-08-07 04:37:39 PM  

Satanic_Hamster: If Rogers is successful, I say take out adds detailing how the CEO of Rogers is a child molester and rapes sheep.


That may still be illegal, so I wouldn't try it.

However, I'd be willing to let you in on the ground floor of my new product launch, 'Placebenol(tm): Clinically proven to cure all forms of genital warts, syphilis and leprosy caused by Rogers Communications'

Might need to work that into a jingle or something.
 
2012-08-07 04:38:17 PM  

ronaprhys: abfalter: This should not even be up for debate.

A person has rights only up to the point where they infringe on the rights of others.

To oversimplify: Free speech is a fine right. But others have the right not to be stolen from. Disingenuous claims by advertising is effectively theft. You have now infringed on another's right; your right of free speech has met it's boundry.

No, it's not theft. If I claim my product, which is a rock I picked up from my back lawn, cures cancer I have not committed theft in any way, shape, or form. I have definitely lied, but not committed theft. If you buy it to cure your cancer and it fails, then sue me for damages. Maybe you can make a case for theft then.


Mine was an imperfect analogy but the basic point was that free speech is not limitless; when it infringes on the rights of others it has met a wall.
 
2012-08-07 04:38:23 PM  
So the takeaway from this is that Rogers' products are such garbage that the only way they can sell them is to lie to their customers?
 
2012-08-07 04:42:27 PM  
By this logic, fraud cannot be a crime.

I think it's rather unlikely that they're going to legalise fraud.

/if they do, I'll just claim to be a Canadian Supreme Court judge and strike it down.
 
2012-08-07 04:45:06 PM  

abfalter: ronaprhys: abfalter: This should not even be up for debate.

A person has rights only up to the point where they infringe on the rights of others.

To oversimplify: Free speech is a fine right. But others have the right not to be stolen from. Disingenuous claims by advertising is effectively theft. You have now infringed on another's right; your right of free speech has met it's boundry.

No, it's not theft. If I claim my product, which is a rock I picked up from my back lawn, cures cancer I have not committed theft in any way, shape, or form. I have definitely lied, but not committed theft. If you buy it to cure your cancer and it fails, then sue me for damages. Maybe you can make a case for theft then.

Mine was an imperfect analogy but the basic point was that free speech is not limitless; when it infringes on the rights of others it has met a wall.


I agree. The point of the law in this case is to PREVENT theft because people buy stuff due to improper advertising claims. If we prevent companies from advertising falsely, the court system will not have to be taken up by piles of cases involving false advertising.
 
2012-08-07 04:46:13 PM  
A ban on lying would indeed be a violation of free speech, but a ban on fraud -dishonestly manipulating people for personal gain- is another matter entirely. If you try to use lying to do that, free speech won't save you, because your lies were not, in and of themselves, the crime.
 
2012-08-07 04:46:20 PM  

cubic_spleen: So the takeaway from this is that Rogers' products are such garbage that the only way they can sell them is to lie to their customers?

 
2012-08-07 04:46:58 PM  
Great, I can't use Bell because they're incompetent, and I can't use Rogers because they're evil. Screw it, I'm going back to smoke signals.
 
2012-08-07 04:48:25 PM  

Satanic_Hamster: If Rogers is successful, I say take out adds detailing how the CEO of Rogers is a child molester and rapes sheep.


The sheep sex was not only sensual, it was consensual.

/a few candles, a glass of wine, a handful of oats...
 
2012-08-07 04:48:37 PM  

ronaprhys: No, it's not theft. If I claim my product, which is a rock I picked up from my back lawn, cures cancer I have not committed theft in any way, shape, or form. I have definitely lied, but not committed theft. If you buy it to cure your cancer and it fails, then sue me for damages. Maybe you can make a case for theft then.


I suppose it depends how you define thievery. A conman tricks a person out of their money, essentially committing theft via lying. Without the lie, the victim would not have parted with their money willingly. I think of false advertising the same way. The lie creates an fake situation where a person would be willing to part with their money. But maybe that's technically fraud instead of thievery?
 
2012-08-07 04:49:06 PM  

Millennium: A ban on lying would indeed be a violation of free speech, but a ban on fraud -dishonestly manipulating people for personal gain- is another matter entirely. If you try to use lying to do that, free speech won't save you, because your lies were not, in and of themselves, the crime.


The Constitution does not permit the government to outlaw manipulating people for personal gain. Sorry.
 
2012-08-07 04:49:33 PM  

SlagginOff: Mugato: Elandriel: Good thing it's Canada. If this were in the US, next year we'd have ads saying Viagra is known to reduce cancer in 99% of clinical trials.

And the Apple Siri sucks off Ben Alleck and brings him to climax. And then lets him know whether it's raining or not.

That was Katy Perry that she let know if it was raining.


No, it was that girl who was in that move with the kid from Third Rock. She played Catwoman.
 
2012-08-07 04:51:19 PM  

Bondith: Great, I can't use Bell because they're incompetent, and I can't use Rogers because they're evil. Screw it, I'm going back to smoke signals.


You can hope that Wind is available in your area
 
2012-08-07 04:53:24 PM  
All tickets/fines written in Canada have to have some way to access the court system to dispute. Tribunals and other kangaroo courts are not held to the same legal standards as federal or provincial court systems.

/Case in point: British Columbia for one year had an instant conviction, by the cop, for drivers blowing over .08bac, instantly subjected to a $4000 fine(no prison or jail time) and no second confirmation reading taken by an in house Breathalyzer. All, of course, was declared unconstitutional a year later. The government is still refusing to refund the 50 million dollars of unconstitutional fines. People blowing over .06bac were subject to a $1000 fine. half the breathalysers at the start of the new unconstitutional law 'accidentally' gave a warning fail at .05bac(not recalibrate for warning and apparently only showing colored lights instead of an actual reading number), which still was not refunded.

//Rogers is pure scum and needs to be dragged through the streets with people hurling rotten fruit at Rogers.
///Committing false information to people is criminal and violates various trade acts of product for sale presentation to the buyer.
////All sales final and guaranteed for 6 minutes or 50 feet.
//Don't get me started on Workmans comp(worksafeBC). Another criminally minded corporation with zero accountability to the courts.
 
2012-08-07 04:53:44 PM  

abfalter: This should not even be up for debate.

A person has rights only up to the point where they infringe on the rights of others.

To oversimplify: Free speech is a fine right. But others have the right not to be stolen from. Disingenuous claims by advertising is effectively theft. You have now infringed on another's right; your right of free speech has met it's boundry.


Hey now, no bringing logic into this!!!


/seriously though, I agree completely
 
2012-08-07 04:54:31 PM  

MaudlinMutantMollusk: It worked for Fox News


There's a difference between lying about a product, such as saying your sunscreen prevents colon cancer in dolphins or whatever, and actually selling lies.

Fox News gets away with it because lies are the product.
 
2012-08-07 04:55:16 PM  

abfalter: This should not even be up for debate.

A person has rights only up to the point where they infringe on the rights of others.

To oversimplify: Free speech is a fine right. But others have the right not to be stolen from. Disingenuous claims by advertising is effectively theft. You have now infringed on another's right; your right of free speech has met it's boundry.


Well said!
 
2012-08-07 04:55:28 PM  
I"m gobsmacked. Canada beat the US to the sleaze. Who'dathunkit?

Politicians are lying because they're still breathing but now companies too?


In other news the inmates are now running the asylum . . .
 
2012-08-07 04:58:55 PM  
static.tvfanatic.com

Mr. Simpson, this is the most BLATANT case of fraudulent advertising since my suit against the film "The Never-Ending Story"!
 
Displayed 50 of 126 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »
Advertisement
On Twitter






In Other Media


  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.

Report