Stu Posted September 30, 2012 Author Share Posted September 30, 2012 The thread is not on the wisdom of a rule. The thread discussion is on the legality of what DCI is permitted to do. You are mistaken if you beleve that a paying customwer could be evicted for failure to stand and cheer a Corps performance..... no matter the fact that DCI passed such an unwise rule. One's restriction of Freedom of Speech rights under the Constitution must show cause. The burden would be on DCI to establish rational reasons before the court for the restriction of one's Freedom of Speech inherent rights. The court would more than likely deem such a rule coersive and arbitrary and without Constitutional standing. DCI can do whatever it wants. But it is inaccurate that any rule that they impose that limits one's Freedom of Speech is within their domain. It is not. And it is not DCI that will determine what they can do for a rule. It is the Court that will decide. And the court does not give great lattitude to large organizations to restrict one's Freedom of Speech willy nilly, and certainly not as liberally as you appear to believe. (Written on the purchase agreement of the ticket) "In the effort to praise all performers (ie rational reason) we will require you refrain from booing any performance and to to clap for all performances; failure to comply with this could cause you to be removed from the venue (rational reaction to non-compliance)". The person who purchases the ticket would contractually agree to such a rule by purchasing the ticket with that disclaimer; and since they are not forced to buy the ticket they, by definition, would voluntarily give up that portion of their free speech through 'voluntary purchase' of the ticket with that disclaimer. And this rationale will hold up in court because they were not 'forced' to buy the ticket, and they did agree to such a dumb statement through purchasing the ticket. So, in that scenario you would lose your law suit of free speech violation. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BRASSO Posted September 30, 2012 Share Posted September 30, 2012 (edited) I don't know, Brasso. As long as DCI was clear when selling the tickets that attendance included a requirement to "participate" as directed by DCI, I think they could indeed do this. The burden clearly would be on DCI to show cause, N.E. Brigand. In order for DCI to state that all in attendance would be REQUIRED to stand and cheer all Corps after their performance, DCI would be challenged in Court with that authority to do so. The Court judge would ask DCI lawyers on what Constitutional grounds ( citing case law, precedent )that they believe permits the organzation to take coercive action to require certain active... active... participation on the part of a DCI show goer merely by their attendance at the event. I know of no judge that would allow DCI to believe they can force people at an event to take any action at all relative to a Corps performance. The notion that DCI can make any rule at all denying one's fundamental Freedom of Speech Rights is certainly a curious one to say the least. There is no automatic carte blanche authority that accrues to DCI to pass any rule at all they want that limits one's Freedom of Speech. Thats silly, and without legal authority thsat would make an audience goer be required to take some required active response to a Corps show. The judge would toss that petition on the part of DCI out of court in a heartbeat. No doubt in my mind at all either. Edited September 30, 2012 by BRASSO Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stu Posted September 30, 2012 Author Share Posted September 30, 2012 I don't know, Brasso. As long as DCI was clear when selling the tickets that attendance included a requirement to "participate" as directed by DCI, I think they could indeed do this. (Or "not participate": I was a competitor on a TV game show once and was able to have a few free tickets held for friends who lived near the taping site. A week's worth of shows was taped over the course of one day, and competitors not yet called for any given "day's" show sat in the audience in a segregated section right across the aisle from where competitors' guests sat. When I came into the studio from the backstage with the other contestants to wait my turn in the audience, I saw my friends and waved, but they sat stone-faced. They had been instructed (though I had not been told) that any interaction with the contestants could result in their and my expulsion.) Sound's sort of like a friend of mine's son who went to a game show and was instructed that he 'had' to clap after each contestant completed their turn, irrespective of how that contestant did on each round, or he would be required to leave the set. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stu Posted September 30, 2012 Author Share Posted September 30, 2012 (edited) There is no automatic carte blanche authority that accrues to DCI to pass any rule at all they want that limits one's Freedom of Speech. Yes there is automatic ability to do so; it is considered 'their' (DCI) dominion, just like you can limit the speech of anyone within your dominion. Edited September 30, 2012 by Stu Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stu Posted September 30, 2012 Author Share Posted September 30, 2012 (edited) From the NOLO law website: Many people assume that the right to free speech, part of the First Amendment of the U.S. Constitution, protects their right to say whatever they want wherever they want. They've got it wrong. Like the rest of the federal Constitution, the First Amendment protects all of us from The Government, not from private companies or non government organizations. While the First Amendment prohibits the government from telling us what we can or cannot say (within reason mainly of safety), it doesn't apply at all to non-government organizations. Done, now back to what would be too far in a drum corps show. Edited September 30, 2012 by Stu Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BRASSO Posted September 30, 2012 Share Posted September 30, 2012 (edited) Yes there is automatic ability to do so; it is considered 'their' (DCI) dominion, just like you can limit the speech of anyone within your dominion. The US Constitution, including its Bill of Rights, is not in DCI's dominion. It is in the dominion of the Courts. DCI can not make ANY rule it wants that limits ANY type of Freedom of Speech it wants ( as you claimed above ). You can think so. But you would be wrong. And any judge in America would tell you that DCI could not pass a rule requiring all show goers to stand and cheer all Corps in performance or be evicted. You may believe that this is in DCI's domain, but it would be seen as an illegal coercive act and as such, any judge would quickly deny the right of DCI to implement and enforce such a rule. Like I said, such an unwise ( and illegal) rule would be tossed out of court in a heartbeat, Stu. Edited September 30, 2012 by BRASSO Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stu Posted September 30, 2012 Author Share Posted September 30, 2012 The US Constitution, including its Bill of Rights, is not in DCI's dominion. It is in the dominion of the Courts. DCI can not make ANY rule it wants that limits ANY type of Freedom of Speech it wants ( as you claimed above ). You can think so. But you would be wrong. And any judge in America would tell you that DCI could not pass a rule requring all show goers to stand and cheer all Corps in performance or be evicted. You may believe that this is in DCI's domain, but it would be seen as an illegal coercive act and as such, any judge would quickly deny the right of DCI to implement and enforce such a rule. Like I said, such an unwise ( and illegal) rule would be tossed out of court in a heartbeat. Read my post #135, the facts are blatantly against you. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BRASSO Posted September 30, 2012 Share Posted September 30, 2012 (edited) Read my post #135, the facts are blatantly against you. No. I don't take orders, Stu. I'd love to have you be a lawyer and go into court and try to defend a new rule that DCI enacted that trys to impose a requirement that all in attendance stand and cheer every corps in the show or be evicted. I'll defend the guy that sat down, but was subsequently evicted for failure to stand and cheer. This would be a slamdunk that DCI overreached its authority, and if you're honest about it, you'll admit it. What if in the oversight and lack of due dilgence in the rule, the one evicted was an incapacitated fan in a wheel chair but under the rule, security were instructed "to evict without exception any and all that did not stand and cheer or be reprimanded and docked half a nites pay". And he was evicted under the rule as ( poorly ) written. You said DCI can pass ANY rule it wants limiting freedoms, so do you want to go to court defending this eviction as well, Stu ? Edited September 30, 2012 by BRASSO Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
actucker Posted September 30, 2012 Share Posted September 30, 2012 The US Constitution, including its Bill of Rights, is not in DCI's dominion. It is in the dominion of the Courts. DCI can not make ANY rule it wants that limits ANY type of Freedom of Speech it wants ( as you claimed above ). You can think so. But you would be wrong. And any judge in America would tell you that DCI could not pass a rule requiring all show goers to stand and cheer all Corps in performance or be evicted. You may believe that this is in DCI's domain, but it would be seen as an illegal coercive act and as such, any judge would quickly deny the right of DCI to implement and enforce such a rule. Like I said, such an unwise ( and illegal) rule would be tossed out of court in a heartbeat, Stu. Yeah, you're wrong here. Sorry. By buying a ticket, you agree to abide by any rules that DCI deems appropriate. Its actually pretty standard when buying a ticket to anything. Usually there is some kind of verbiage in the fine print when buying the ticket that mentions that "so and so has the right to remove any spectator who is in violation of a rule" etc. Again, freedom of speech applies to the government, not private business. There's tons and tons of case law to prove exactly what Stu and I are talking about. If you don't believe us, look at any message board ever. How do you think they have moderators, rules about what topics can be talked about, deletions and even edits of posts with or without notice etc. As long as the rules are provided, and there is verbiage somewhere in the process of buying the tickets (or printed on the stub) that mentions that ticket holders agree to compliance, its considered a contract, and thus is legally binding. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
N.E. Brigand Posted September 30, 2012 Share Posted September 30, 2012 Really? You mean that the Bluecoats did not push the limits of community standards with their first few "Creep" shows having a curse word [A line from the Radiohead song was quoted "What the Hell am I doing here?" --n.e.b.] over the amp system? 71 years after "####"* was used in Gone With the Wind, the most popular movie ever? (And wikipedia says that contrary to legend, David O. Selznick did not pay the Hays Office $5,000 for that use: they had changed the rule earlier the same year to allow both "####"* and "Hell".) 62 years after "Give 'em Hell, Harry!" became an unofficial slogan of Harry Truman? (President Truman's own response to that cry from a supporter: "I don't give them Hell. I just tell the truth about them and they think it's Hell.") No. Hollywood movies utilize adult professionals and many movies are rated R to XXX The MPAA rating system has justly been the source of much criticism. The reviewers may be professional, in that they are paid, but their expertise is questionable. *DCP is still stuck in 1938 as regards the homophone for "dam", apparently. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts