I was reading about the allegations against Russell Brand and couldn’t help but wonder how it works legally that his revenue can be blocked based on allegations and before any juridical ruling.

Don’t get me wrong I don’t know much about the guy and what he did or didn’t do and agree that anyone should be punished according to their crimes.

But how is this possible with the principal of innocent until proven guilty? I’d be happy if someone could explain me.

    • noride@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      17
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      The overwhelming majority of big companies include a morality clause in their sponsorship contracts that allows them to terminate deals with endorsers based on public sentiment.

      • Big P@feddit.uk
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        They can usually terminate the agreement at any time for any reason

    • jet@hackertalks.com
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      11
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      You can sue anybody for anything. So sure, do they have actionable grounds? No.

      In private commerce there is no compunction for people to do business with you.

      It becomes different if we talk about utilities, power water internet.

        • jet@hackertalks.com
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          4
          ·
          1 year ago

          Let’s do a fun thought experiment.

          Let’s say I open a gas station chain called " fuck Ted ".

          If anybody with Ted on their credit card tried to fill up the tank it would just deny it. They go inside to talk to the cashier, and they saw the name was Ted they would say fuck you Ted and refuse to sell them anything.

          A real fuck you in particular contender.

          I think this would be a totally legal business. It’s not discriminating any protected class. Sucks to be Ted