Lawsuit Gets Filed against Pokemon Go!

Discussion in 'Gaming' started by TheDarkAngel7, Sep 21, 2016.

  1. Hey Everyone,

    So I was just browsing the internet and I stumbled across this... it's not just here, it's all over the internet when you google "pokemon go lawsuit":

    the company that developed Pokémon Go, alleging that the game is placing Pokéstops and Pokémon Gyms on private property without permission. The suit accuses the users of the app of creating a nuisance and claims that the defendants are being unjustly enriched at the expense of the property owners.

    I created this thread so you guys could "Voice your opinion", I know there's a lot of people (including myself) that loved this and started walking much more, voice your opinion here. Do you think the lawsuit is just an excuse so that the property owners could get a share of the earnings from Pokemon Go! or do you think that the lawsuit is a very good point by the property owners?
  2. you dont have to go on to people's property

    wow that was an easy solution

    "dont go on people's property, k? just walk by and spin the wheel ez pz"
    Tuqueque likes this.
  3. Well... most Pokéstops and Gyms aren't hand-picked, I think, so that's why there are quite some that will be in bad places. I think it's the player's responsibility here, and not the developer's. I understand that they're doing this, though, and I'd be interested to know how it ends.
  4. People are always talking about how Pokemon go is dangerous and people are trespassing. This is somewhat true but its not the developers fault here. The thing is don't go climbing a cliff to get a Pokemon, don't go on someones property without permission, don't walk into the street and not look where your going, etc.. Its your fault if you are stupid and kill yourself by not paying attention to your surroundings playing this app. Stupid humans XD
    607 likes this.
  5. lol it even says "Do not trespass while playing Pokemon Go" when you open the game.
  6. Yet another BS lawsuit by greedy self-righteous fluffs trying to cash in. Just another byproduct of the entitlement culture we've fostered. Hopefully the courts throw this one out.

    Something to keep in mind: Niantic has already shown itself willing to remove content from "sensitive" areas on request. (link) If the homeowners were really interested in making their property a blank-site and getting rid of the "nuisance," they'd make similar requests, not try to gouge compensation out of a corporation to pad their pockets. They don't deserve ****.
  7. ^

    Lawyers putting food on the table. Judges and clerks get paid too. ;)
  8. Those kind of lawyers make me wish Roman crucifixion was still an option.
  9. Just because it's not legal doesn't mean you can't do it.
    Megumin_x and TromboneSteve like this.
  10. Although true it also doesn't help that organizations and institutions which send out a plea for help in order to get their areas excluded are often met with silence.

    If a burial ground or memorial area asks to exclude their property: how hard can it be? Yet this is the #1 issue it seems. Even Google learned this lesson and has provided a way for everyone to request a blurr out from Google maps. It's not as if the developers couldn't have foreseen these problems.

    So from that perspective I definitely consider them to be lacking on those issues.
    607 and gladranger7 like this.
  11. There's a really big cemetery were I live. It's like a park with cemetery really cause there's so much land not used yet.

    It's a great place to walk the dog and take a bike ride during the summer months. There are always joggers and dog walkers there.

    When Pokemon Go happened that place had 5 gyms and about 50 pokestops. It was the best place to play and be out of harms way, specially for the kids.

    Now it's just a cemetery again.
    607 likes this.
  12. If this lawsuit were against poor customer service and/or ignoring the requests of the homeowners, that'd be one thing. If they've made attempts to contact Niantic and have PG locations removed from their property, and were subsequently ignored or snubbed, fine. I could see a lawsuit contesting that.

    But it's not. It's very specifically a class-action lawsuit that says "Hey, you're making money off [our property], we want a cut." And that is completely unacceptable to me - it's not about property or peace of mind, it's just a bunch of self-entitled *censored* out for money.
    Gawadrolt, 607 and SoulPunisher like this.
  13. I'm on the border on this one. If my property is selected as a pokestop or gym or whatever and people start gathering on my lawn, I think I have a right to be upset.

    However, trying to use this as a way to make money is not okay. It's simply a pathetic excuse to earn money.
    607, gladranger7 and Kephras like this.
  14. I don't agree with Pokémon. I think that companies have the right to block lunatics from crawling all over their lawns at night.... people are getting killed cuz I get scared and I shot em.... so people don't go on private property, and PG don't give them reason to. . . also I don't want some idiot wondering by and chasing some stupid Pokémon and dishonoring someone's memory who died or served this nation to make it the place it is now... in some ways this would be like me sueing Pepsi for making a shirt I love cuz I was being used as a billboard and I demanded part of the profit... I will be interested to see what happens...

    DISCLAIMER: this is an opinion I am not demanding all people see my view. please not freak out and get mad.
  15. so which side are u on?
  16. Then don't shoot people? It's not hard.

    People doing stupid shit like going onto private property to catch some stupid virtual Pokemon are all isolated incidents anyway. This doesn't happen.
    607 and Kephras like this.
  17. man soul u are good I was about to go off on you... u should be MR. Worlds-best-Annoyer
    well done irritant of EMC
    gosh u just know how to push my buttons...
  18. Wow I didn't expect this would happen :eek:
  19. So let me break the events of the last ten minutes down... I disagreed with you and provided a statement in a totally calm manner. This somehow enraged you. I am now the 'World's Best Annoyer' and the 'The Irritant of EMC'. Sound logic.

    If it pleases you that much and gets you to write some kind of actual reply to me for once I will gladly take those titles.
    ChickenDice, Gawadrolt, 607 and 2 others like this.
  20. I think this is getting a little heated here :confused:
    gladranger7 likes this.