Legal Questions: Pink Defense

[logue]

I apologize for the long post in advance, but feel it’s necessary to bring the relevant considerations to light before judgments are made.

I have lurked on these boards since nearly 1995, rarely posting since so many questions come down to “What will the GM allow?” I appreciate the amount of trust placed in the GM by this game system, and so I normally resort to direct communication with my GM. The question I have of a legal matter. My gaming group consists of engineers (mostly computer related) and Mail Delivery Specialists. We possess all the combined legal knowledge that can be gleaned from watching “Law and Order and the History Channel (i.e none at all). I realize that the final arbiter of this issue is, in fact, my GM. Unfortunately my GM, I, and the rest of my gaming group have no real world knowledge on which to base our decisions.

So I beseech the members of this community to dispel my ignorance with some level of real world expertise.

I’m in a super hero campaign. Our main opposition, at this point, is a lawyer (Ms W.) with minimal super-powers (High PRE and possible low level Mind Control). She does not directly oppose the super-heroes; but wisely, sends others to perform nefarious deed on her behalf. This has caused us to attempt to gather intelligence on her and her boss(es); Corporation CPT. Thus far these attempts have been thwarted by the “Pink Defense”. The Pink Defense is a form of precognition that determines if you are going to perform actions that are to the detriment of Ms. W’s parent corporation (CPT); and if you are, then it transforms you into a bright pink version of yourself. It works on mice intent on stealing food from the break room (acting on natural instinct). It works on a temporary fashion for those who have the intent, but do not follow through on the intent. It works PERMAENTLY on people opposed to the operation of the corporation in their city who trespass on corporation property to throw stink bombs in to the reception area of Corporation CPT; and then retreat. The retreat was prevented by uniformed security personnel in most cases. Those detained by security personnel were eventually released free of the “Pink Defense”. Those who avoided the security personnel are still bright pink.

My question is “What are the legal ramifications of the “Pink Defense” according to legal precedent currently in effect?” We know that this defense applies to employees of corporation CPT as well as every single person entering the business property of Corporation CPT or the personal premises of Ms. W. There are no signs posted declaring the existence of the “Pink Defense”.

My line of questioning; based on my exceptionally limited knowledge of the legal field falls into two main categories. Please expound on any additional lines of argument that I have neglected and do not limit yourself to the lines of argument that I have delineated.

Does the “Pink Defense” violate any legal protection versus unreasonable search and seizure for employees that have signed a contract with stipulations regarding search in relation to determining “moral turpitude”.

Does the “Pink Defense” constitute a form of slavery to Corp CPT? Consider that failure to act in the corporation’s best interest, regardless of morality, ethics, or legality; and that any abrogation of the corporation’s best interests results in an irreversible change (turning bright pink) to that person with the ONLY recourse being petitioning the corporation for reversal of the same

Thanks for your patience in reading this ridiculously long post and any responses; with especial thanks to those versed in the legal arts for their responses.

[Ian Mackinder]

Re: Legal Questions: Pink Defense

 

Yikes.

 

Not a legal expert, but it does sound to me like this 'Pink Defense' would be a MAJOR violation of both civil rights and safety laws. This corporation is using an unknown (or, at least, very very very undocumented) process on people without either prior warning OR prior consent. No indications as to possible long-term effects, or even that these have ever been examined.

 

Sounds to me like this bunch would get into a world of hurt very quickly - the class action suits will be simply ROLLING in.

[DusterBoy]

Re: Legal Questions: Pink Defense

 

No way this is legal. And everyone knows that pink is teh ebil.

 

(No not P!nk the singer fools, pink the "colour" )

[McCoy]

Re: Legal Questions: Pink Defense

 

Wow.

 

It's 4 am here, I may have a different answer after I think about it. But my first reaction is that unless the trespassers can claim they are being harmed by being turned pink, the corporation could argue that this is no different than identifying them through security camera footage. If the pink people didn't do what the company claims they did, they are, of course, free to pursue that matter through the civil courts (probably a bluff, this would involve disclosing in open court just how the "pink defense" selects those it turns pink and what precautions are in place to prevent false positives).

 

Employees, much more complex, probably depends on how coercive the demands are for receiving the "cure." If it is something like "Sign the non-disclosure agreement, hand in your resignation, clean out your desk, and it will fade by the time you leave the building," I'm thinking legal. If it involves any sort of "get back to work and we'll see," more questionable. I may be back after I figure out just what questions I need to ask.

[kahuna's bro]

Re: Legal Questions: Pink Defense

 

why is the print inthe OP so small ?i can barely read it

[wick]

Re: Legal Questions: Pink Defense

 

I would think that there would be a lot of Pink people working at the company. I mean it is pretty extreme trigger. just think about an employee who gets frustrated at the fax machine and...whoosh turns Pink. The trigger seems really too touchy to be useful.

 

If you think about this in terms of Dye markers in bank vault money bags (the closest analogy) sure the criminals can't sue the banks for being dyed (not sure in if true) but then again bank robbery is a fairly serious crime and criminals know there maybe dye and take the risk. In terms of the pink defense, in a normal society people have an expectation not to be turned pink for some minor activity, it seems overkill for minor crimes much less bad feelings towards the company.

 

Intent: People can be held in the Custody of law enforcement officers if there is a risk of a person committing a serious crime but they are otherwise not imprisioned for very long unless they had committed a crime and are otherwise unpunished. This company seems to punish people and mice above and beyond established legal boundaries. Only in extreme cases such as threats made against our countries leader or threats against national security is there an extreme reaction for actually doing nothing.

 

Ohh.. and my advice on taking down this company:

A. find an insider and convince him that he needs to provide you with certain information to "help the company." In fact the information would be damning.

B. infiltrate the company and take the pink hit, hope that you can fix this condition later. Note: That being pink colored will only have cause a major/ imprison reaction toward security at the company that you just took down..i.e. you will just have the stigma of being pink.

C. Same as B, but up your Power Defense.

[Netzilla]

Re: Legal Questions: Pink Defense

 

Does the “Pink Defense” constitute a form of slavery to Corp CPT? Consider that failure to act in the corporation’s best interest' date=' regardless of morality, ethics, or legality; and that any abrogation of the corporation’s best interests results in an irreversible change (turning bright pink) to that person with the ONLY recourse being petitioning the corporation for reversal of the same[/font']

 

Not a lawyer, but I suspect that this would end up violating various Whistleblower laws.

[Beast]

Re: Legal Questions: Pink Defense

 

what about paint bombs in money that banks toss in when you rob them

while this is paint that will wear off with time (and a lot of scubbing)

 

marking a tresspasser might be legal to ID that they did tresspass(you can only get marked in a certain area)

but marking someone on their thoughts is totally invasion of privacy and the 5th amendment

 

lets say somebody from PETA hated the animal testing and wanted to take the CPT to court to ruin them would be come pink along with anybody who helped them

or the resident down the street from the HQ that hates how all the parking dumps on to their street because it is the fastest way to the freeway and at 5pm it is a mad house

[McCoy]

Re: Legal Questions: Pink Defense

 

If you think about this in terms of Dye markers in bank vault money bags (the closest analogy) sure the criminals can't sue the banks for being dyed (not sure in if true)

This is America. You can sue anyone for any reason or no reason. Winning is a separate issue.

 

If you think about this in terms of Dye markers in bank vault money bags (the closest analogy) sure the criminals can't sue the banks for being dyed (not sure in if true) but then again bank robbery is a fairly serious crime and criminals know there maybe dye and take the risk. In terms of the pink defense' date=' in a normal society people have an expectation not to be turned pink for some minor activity, it seems overkill for minor crimes much less bad feelings towards the company. [/quote']

marking a tresspasser might be legal to ID that they did tresspass(you can only get marked in a certain area)

but marking someone on their thoughts is totally invasion of privacy and the 5th amendment

Again, can pursue that in civil court, but to get the criminal justice system involved would mean first making a prima facie case that the "victims" were being harmed, beyond being embarrassed, by being turned pink.

[casualplayer]

Re: Legal Questions: Pink Defense

 

Again' date=' can pursue that in civil court, but to get the criminal justice system involved would mean first making a [i']prima facie[/i] case that the "victims" were being harmed, beyond being embarrassed, by being turned pink.

 

Prima facie! Arrrgh!

 

Oh wait, you used it correctly. Nevermind.

[Balabanto]

Re: Legal Questions: Pink Defense

 

Just because it turns someone pink does not mean that they are visible. Send an invisible guy in to steal the information you need, and when they try to say the evidence was illegally obtained, you tell the judge "It's unreasonable for us to rely on ordinary methods when any attempt to acquire the information legally under normal circumstances would have resulted in our inability to obtain the information in the first place. It should be illegal to use the law to bypass the legal system." Alternatively, go invisible and "Donate" the information you steal to the police department. You're going to be pink whether you do this or not. Just how big is the radius of this effect, anyway? You should test that to see how far it goes. If it covers the world, then you can get the government to shut them down, as if it crosses any national boundaries, technically, that's an act of war performed by private citizens, and constitutes terrorism. The nature of the effect is irrelevant. If I go to Canada, and I plot against this corporation, and I still turn pink, then there's an issue. If I go to venezuela, and I plot, and I still turn pink, there's an issue. You just have to document your research.

 

Alternatively, break into the computers of the IRS and turn pink. So what? Schedule them for a comprehensive audit of all their corporate holdings. No man can escape the IRS, and no woman or super can either. And if the IRS turns pink, well, all that will do is convince the IRS that the corporation is guilty, and make them look harder.

[McCoy]

Re: Legal Questions: Pink Defense

 

Prima facie! Arrrgh!

 

Oh wait, you used it correctly. Nevermind.

Considered using a smiley behind it, thought too few people would get it.

[McCoy]

Re: Legal Questions: Pink Defense

 

Just how big is the radius of this effect' date=' anyway? You should test that to see how far it goes. If it covers the world, then you can get the government to shut them down, as if it crosses any national boundaries, technically, that's an act of war performed by private citizens, and constitutes terrorism. The nature of the effect is irrelevant. If I go to Canada, and I plot against this corporation, and I still turn pink, then there's an issue. If I go to venezuela, and I plot, and I still turn pink, there's an issue. You just have to document your research.[/quote']

Good point!

[Beast]

Re: Legal Questions: Pink Defense

 

turning somebody pink could be construed as vandalism and maybe even battery

throwing acid in ones face is a crime as it changes the persons looks even if it does not damage the eyes

 

there is the Spartacus ploy where everybody goes and has ill thoughts against CPT(even employees may hate their bosses and get turned pink and fired)to sue CPT and bring them down through massive lawsuits

 

in any case CPT is just going to have a bad time

the sniper mentalist goes and hits the CEO,CFO,etc with a short term mind control or mental illusion to get them turned pink

and then a cure will be found and the power turned off forever and the creator fired

 

 

This is America. You can sue anyone for any reason or no reason. Winning is a separate issue.

 

 

 

Again, can pursue that in civil court, but to get the criminal justice system involved would mean first making a prima facie case that the "victims" were being harmed, beyond being embarrassed, by being turned pink.

[McCoy]

Re: Legal Questions: Pink Defense

 

turning somebody pink could be construed as vandalism and maybe even battery

throwing acid in ones face is a crime as it changes the persons looks even if it does not damage the eyes

No, you cannot vandalize a person, only an inanimate object such as a building or a car. Throwing acid causes pain and potentially causes scars, don't think (I'm assuming) painlessly turning someone pink rises to the same level. But disagreements like this are why we have judges (and remember in this case the judges are literally controlled by the GM).

[Beast]

Re: Legal Questions: Pink Defense

 

ok so what would you call changing the color of somebody's skin color with out their permission and they commited no crime against CPT(may have thought it but have not acted on it)

remember the 5th amendment protects you from self incrimination, and this power circumvents that

 

also the GM came to us for thoughts

 

No' date=' you cannot vandalize a person, only an inanimate object such as a building or a car. Throwing acid causes pain and potentially causes scars, don't think (I'm assuming) painlessly turning someone pink rises to the same level. But disagreements like this are why we have judges (and remember in this case the judges are literally controlled by the GM).[/quote']

[Balabanto]

Re: Legal Questions: Pink Defense

 

That's a hate crime, Beast. Also an excellent point. Many minority groups would be quick to point out that turning people "Pink" is the effective equivalent of turning them "non-black" or "non-asian" or "non-hispanic." The whole thing could be construed as racially motivated, or a colossal act of hate speech.

[McCoy]

Re: Legal Questions: Pink Defense

 

ok so what would you call changing the color of somebody's skin color with out their permission and they commited no crime against CPT(may have thought it but have not acted on it)

If you passed out drunk and a buddy drew a magic marker moustach on your face, would that constitute battery? Not in any jurisdictition I know of. Might rise to harassment, take it to civil court.

 

remember the 5th amendment protects you from self incrimination' date=' and this power circumvents that [/quote']

Only if the pink people are being charged with a crime, and the "pink defense" is admissible in court.

 

also the GM came to us for thoughts

No, a player came to us,

I realize that the final arbiter of this issue is, in fact, my GM. Unfortunately my GM, I, and the rest of my gaming group have no real world knowledge on which to base our decisions.

[Ockham's Spoon]

Re: Legal Questions: Pink Defense

 

Whether or not this is legal in your superhero world depends on the tone of the campaign. For anti-mutant type of setting it would almost certainly be illegal, because people are scared of powers. For a more cyber-punk style, it may very well be legal, because corporations control everything, including the government. In a four color campaign, it would probably be portrayed as a clever trap for "good guys" but a dirty, underhanded trick if used by "bad guys".

 

Personally I think public outcry would force the company to end the practice, legal or not, especially as people learn about it and get angry thoughts about the Pink Defense, which could turn them pink, and then their friends and relatives would be outraged and start turning pink too. Before long half the country would be pink and mob mentality takes over.

 

One final point to consider though. Any judge considering ruling the Pink Defense illegal would likely turn pink. Consider how that would affect their decision.

[Netzilla]

Re: Legal Questions: Pink Defense

 

If you passed out drunk and a buddy drew a magic marker moustach on your face' date=' would that constitute battery? Not in any jurisdictition I know of. Might rise to harassment, take it to civil court.[/quote']

 

The magic marker isn't permanent like the 'Pink Defense' apparently is. So, one might make a case for disfigurement. How would it be handled if it were a tattoo rather than magic marker?

 

Only if the pink people are being charged with a crime, and the "pink defense" is admissible in court.

I have to wonder if an argument could be made regarding the 'pinkness' biasing the jury in such a case; kind of like not allowing a bank robber to wash the ink off their hands before trial.

 

I also suspect that the corporation in question would be beset by pink animal rights activists as pink mice (already mentioned), squirrels (digging up the company lawn), birds (beware pigeon bombing runs), etc, start turning up all over the place.

 

I think this corporation is going to be spending a lot of money on legal fees.

[Broadsword]

Re: Legal Questions: Pink Defense

 

I was thinking similar to Balabanto when I read the first post. How big an area does the effect cover? A small area confined to the corporate properties could be argued to be a security system, or crime prevention system, but if it goes out into public property the Corporation is in trouble.

 

Who determines the intent of the actions? If it is the person committing the action, then you should be able to convince people that what they are doing is in the corporations best interest and so then you could rationalize just about anything, including closing down the whole company.

 

If it is a powered person who is causing the effect, then you should just need to get at that person, (or machine) and then the problem will be gone. My vote is it is probably a machine of some kind. You could pull a "Ghost Busters" and get the EPA involved!!

[dmjalund]

Re: Legal Questions: Pink Defense

 

I had an image of the Jury, one by one, turning pink

[McCoy]

Re: Legal Questions: Pink Defense

 

The magic marker isn't permanent like the 'Pink Defense' apparently is. So' date=' one might make a case for disfigurement. How would it be handled if it were a tattoo rather than magic marker?[/quote']

OP said it was reversable.

[AnotherSkip]

Re: Legal Questions: Pink Defense

 

Hi! As Logues Gm I would like to chime in here.

 

A few things: testing has determined that...

 

It is limited to organics with brains on the property of the company and some of the residences they have provided to their employees.

 

It Is reversable so long as the individual admits to exactly what they have done wrong to Warthaw. Mechanically speaking it is a Transform but does not have Sticky (+1/2) Attached....

 

Shooting someone on the property from outside of the property does not turn them Pink.

Logue himself (Playing the versatile Mr Zero) has determined that stretching to say accquire objects/files would turn him pink. in essence the power has a warning setting. However it WILL cross over Shapeshifting *

 

It is Known....

 

Part of the contracts for this group in particular include clauses agreeing to surveilance while at their wokplace and at other company provided locations. in addition to a reasonable measures to prevent moral turpitude clause.

 

It is not known: if there are pink pigeons out there.

(the Campaign notes are here... http://www.criticalfumble.net/forum/showthread.php?t=16797 )

 

* and Multiform and Dulplication powers.

 

This is a puzzle to be solved by the team. So there are several details i feel i cannot share. At least one player has the abilities to solve this easly. However I certainly have no ill will for the player posting this. Good job Logue

[Roth]

Re: Legal Questions: Pink Defense

 

Let me get this straight... if mice steal food from the break room that turns them pink because it harms "the company". How does this harm the company? It may harm an employee of the company, but as a whole the company will not really be impacted. Now if some one forms the intent to harm the company they also turn pink. What that means is that if some one were to intend to steal from the company they would turn pink and if some one at the company (high or low on the totem pole) was to do an illegal act that had nothing immediately to do with the company they would also turn pink, because if they were caught or exposed it would also harm the company. This means that Ms W would be constantly Pink, because if she is the mastermind behind various crimes, exposure of those crimes would also harm the company. If people who stink bomb the lobbey of the company building turn pink, because of harm to the company (and by the example of the mouse the company includes all employees) then for sure any employee or board member or whatever doing a crime, any crime, will also turn pink because doing so impacts other members of the company and will cause them some form of harm, whether physical, mental or emotional (cause a stink bomb would be some sort of emotional/mental harm to employees and anybody they run into afterwards) thus harming the company.

 

 

 

This also relies on how far the Pink Defense influences spreads. If it's only on the property of the company then only misdeeds against the company will make people pink when they are at work. This would include anybody thinking, when they are at work, about doing a crime that's not against the company, but is a crime in general because of the above reasons, If it is city/state/nation/world wide then we have people turning pink in their homes, if they are employees and doing any of the above. This would include Ms W and any of the upper echelon who think about doing illegal acts for the above mentioned reasons.

 

This is taking things to a logical extreme, but rules often do that. `` Causing Harm to the Company`` is a pretty big area of statement as we can see and who turns pink will depend on how the effect occurs. If the Pink Defense is caused by some kind of spell, power or machine, all of the people who harm the company, in any way whatsoever (and that means it doesn`t matter if the harm will increase the profits of the upper echelon or not) will turn pink (depending on area affected). If the effect is caused by a person who sees precognitively that these things will happen, then the company has him or her in their back pocket and it might not cause every person who might cause harm to the company to turn Pink.

 

I wrote this just after Anotherskip wrote his reply to the post... I`m just gonna leave my post as is, but some of my questions have been answered