• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

OMG, some attorneys never cease to amaze me!

Page 2 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
Originally posted by: SarcasticDwarf
Originally posted by: gopunk
Originally posted by: SarcasticDwarf
Originally posted by: gopunk
uh, this lawsuit isn't necessarily frivolous (given just the facts posted here)



Even if it is not, the actions of the lawyers are unethical.

how exactly are they unethical?



Their actions encourage people to sue over near anything. They don't care about the individual, they just want as many people in on their lawsuits as possible.

i don't see how they encourage people to sue over nearly anything... i think vision loss is a pretty serious matter. and as for the ad, there is obviously financial incentive for them to get as many people represented as they can, but there are other legitimate reasons for doing so as well. you don't want injured people being left out and coming back a few years from now trying to sue the company again.
 
Originally posted by: gopunk
Originally posted by: SarcasticDwarf
Originally posted by: gopunk
Originally posted by: SarcasticDwarf
Originally posted by: gopunk
uh, this lawsuit isn't necessarily frivolous (given just the facts posted here)



Even if it is not, the actions of the lawyers are unethical.

how exactly are they unethical?



Their actions encourage people to sue over near anything. They don't care about the individual, they just want as many people in on their lawsuits as possible.

i don't see how they encourage people to sue over nearly anything... i think vision loss is a pretty serious matter. and as for the ad, there is obviously financial incentive for them to get as many people represented as they can, but there are other legitimate reasons for doing so as well. you don't want injured people being left out and coming back a few years from now trying to sue the company again.

C'mon, the side effects are spelled out. There is a trade off...pleasure or possible loss of sight....hmmm. 🙂

 
I wonder - how many of those joining the suit obtained Viagra through means other than a prescription from their regular doctor?
How many obtained Viagra via those internet places where a doctor doesn't actually examine you?
 
Originally posted by: DrPizza
I wonder - how many of those joining the suit obtained Viagra through means other than a prescription from their regular doctor?
How many obtained Viagra via those internet places where a doctor doesn't actually examine you?

Probably alot and that could be part of the problem, where people who are ot in good health and should not be taking it, are.

 
Back
Top