And yet, that’s what he’s asking for, which is why I said the argument was over 8 bucks.
[quote=“PB, post:15, topic:14175”]
Moreover, the law he cites doesn’t specifically make this illegal. It just allows the AGO to make regulations.
[/quote]The links you posted don’t work for me, but I’ll trust your analysis. I figured Edelman had done his homework so went by his reading of the law.
He’s a real winner, routinely bragging that he makes $800/hr as a consultant on the side while racking up conflict of interest allegations as an academic.
http://www.businessweek.com/articles/2014-03-13/harvards-ben-edelman-web-sheriff-may-have-a-conflict-or-two
Just another cheap prick with a sense of entitlement.
I fixed the links. It is vaguely interesting. It’s not clear that posting the wrong price is even illegal. I.e., the law seems to recognize that prices change and it’s not always possible to find and correct every possible listing of prices that a consumer may see, which is why the law requires the intent to hide the actual price and to do so with the intent to defraud the purchaser.
Well, let’s just focus on the Boston area Edelman who runs the slashing routes for Tom Brady…
I actually had a fair amount of respect for Edelman with his early work on Internet based spamming and adware.
That respect is gone.
He’s spending a lot of electrons rationalizing why he’s not a jerk in this case. He, better than most, should understand that when you’re explaining, you’re losing…
Honestly, there must be something up with this guy… Either he’s on the autism spectrum or he’s got some other things going on in his life. Is this really just about $4?
White privilege gone wild?
It reads like an email exchange with Patrick Bateman!!
OK, I’ve switched my position. I have been frustrated before by being overcharged when a price in the cash register doesn’t match what’s on the price list, and having my concerns met with apathy from the cashier. But after having read the correspondence between Mr. Edelman and the restaurant I find myself wanting to be on the opposite side of whatever argument this douche finds himself in.
His web page at HBS:
http://www.hbs.edu/faculty/Pages/profile.aspx?facId=417579
His personal blog:
Guy sounds like Harvard Business School’s version of Charles C. Johnson.
That brings back my memory of the “business card” scene. Classic!
Sounds like Roy L. Peason Jr. all over again. Remember him? Judge Fancy Pants? Sued a dry cleaner for $67,000,000 over one pair of lost pants. He was widely ridiculed but he COULD NOT STOP SUING THEM. He eventually lost his job as an administrative law judge in DC because he displayed a lack of “judicial temperament.” Sounds like the same thing all over again.
On a somewhat more serious note…, this kind of publicity tends to undermine Edelman’s value as an expert witness in any context, which illustrates a stunning lack of contextual self and social awareness.
I don’t know if this would enter into his tenure discussions next year, but it really should.
This kind of stuff is really unfortunate. Although many here have compared this guy to Republicans, the reality is that Republicans have been engaged in a lengthy battle to curtail consumer access to courts. Behavior like this becomes the poster child for “lawsuit abuse,” leading to calls for more restrictive consumer laws and consumer access to courts - which ultimately benefits big business at consumer expense. People will happily give up their rights when they think they are doing so to stop douche bags like this, without realizing they are actually ceding more power to big business.
Not a good week for professors from Boston. First Gruber, and now this guy coming down on an independent businessman who failed to make some minor changes on a website.
Yes, and the reason the penalty is triple the overcharge is to discourage businesses from overcharging. Not updating prices on a website is a great way to lure people in and then charge more. If the only penalty is refunding a direct overcharge, the number of customers who won’t notice the overcharge means the business profits unreasonably.
In the Boston.com article showing the full exchange, the person from the restaurant (son of owner?) claims there is a website for this specific restaurant but it isn’t actually working–and they don’t have the resources to keep it up to date. That isn’t a reasonable excuse–if they have time to raise prices, they have time to inform their customers.
Just because someone is a self-satisfied jerk (and I have no idea whether that is true) doesn’t mean he never makes a good point.
No, it’s about how this business gets away with overcharging all its customers by pretending it has no idea the wrong prices are on its website.
This is right up there with “Old man yells at cloud” in terms of newsworthiness.
Don’t forget the one star review on Yelp!