corp1

...when I think about human rights, I don’t think about an ROI. When I think about making our products accessible for the people that can’t see or to help a kid with autism, I don’t think about a bloody ROI, and by the same token, I don’t think about helping our environment from an ROI point of view.

If you only want me to make things, make decisions that have a clear ROI, then you should get out of the stock.

williamlondon said:

narwhal said:

They were smart to bail from Apple, and California employment laws prevent Apple from doing much about it.

Why? And what do California's labor laws have to do with it?

If they had equity in Nuvia then they may have enjoyed a huge buyout payday – probably vastly larger than the regular salary + bonus they'd have received if they'd stayed with Apple. That's likely the primary motivation to form Nuvia in the first place. It's potentially a second payday for staff who were originally part of PA Semi when it was acquired by Apple in 2008.

As I understand it, California law voids non-compete clauses (which Apple and many other companies attempt to use regardless of enforceability) in employment contracts. Anti-poaching arrangements are also illegal.

wonkothesane said:

Bizarre, how the individuals that crushed and stomped over the victims apparently are not on the liability radar. Ah, I see, more effort, less deep pockets… not worth the effort; and why share liability when there is the easy way.

Edit: fixed typo

Imagine a crowd of people packed in tightly. Suddenly a couple of them stumble or briefly lean on or grab onto the people in front of them, causing a whole line of people to lean or fall forward, applying hundreds of pounds of force to those at the front who are pressed against a metal fence or barrier. Whose fault is it?

A likely answer could be: the event staff who designed the venue and let it become unsafely crowded.

viclauyyc said:

Why sue Apple except for money grab?

Apple was streaming the concert online, the whole idea is so people don’t need to go to the concert. 

Why not sue the bus company because they give people ride to the concert. Or sue Coca-cola as they provide drink?

Part of it is certainly the "deep pockets" principle where plaintiffs will sue parties with the greatest ability to pay damages.

The tricky bit will be to show that Apple (along with the promoter, artist, venue, etc.) is liable, since Apple was streaming the event and could conceivably have paused it at any time for "technical difficulties."

davgreg said:

When you have literally thousands of people pushing ever forward to a stage and you are trapped up close to the front the danger is very real. The pressure was so great it lifted us and all around us up off the ground- off our feet - which is as disturbing as you could imagine. I held her hand and when I got my feet down we got up off the Schleyer Halle floor and sat in the regular (cheaper) seats.  Nobody was killed that night but there were many injured and many more scared out of their wits.

Even a small pileup or domino effect of 10 people can create hundreds of pounds of pressure; in a huge crowd where everyone is packed in like sardines it can be thousands of pounds.

It's no surprise that large festivals will overlap multiple popular acts to reduce crowding and keep people moving.  Hopefully Live Nation will be able to improve their crowd management and safety protocols and thereby save lives; we may also see more calls to ban festival seating entirely:

"These types of horrific situations will continue to occur until festival seating and concert[s] are again banned forever.”
https://www.cincinnati.com/story/news/2021/11/08/astroworld-festival-houston-reminds-of-cincinnati-the-who-concert-1979/6337647001/