MGM Resorts in Vegas,, that runs the Delano (Home of the $5 charge for you to make coffee in your own room) and the now Infamous Mandalay Bay, along with Circus Circus, Luxor, Bellagio, Mirage, the Grand, and others... has decided to SUE 1000 victims of the shooter from his room in the Mandalay Bay... conspiracy theorists notwithstanding.
MGM sues Las Vegas massacre survivors, claiming a Sept. 11-era terrorism law protects the company from lawsuits
Anyone aware of the Gellatly lawsuit stupidity, including those paying the bill, are well aware that there's no basis for the lawsuit of his against a PCO, a SLAP-style suit designed to silence the massive opposition to his continuing and idiotic tenure as GOP party chair.
That same principle applies here.
The weakness of these suits is obvious.
The black eye MGM has managed to give itself will, over time, far exceed the costs of fighting these suits based on the merits of the case.
This public relations disaster makes it clear that MGM Resorts simply do not give a damn about people... not that they don't make that clear when they charge $5 per cup of coffee that you make in your room yourself... and actually, as word of this disaster spreads, the people, correspondingly, are going to give less and less of a damn about MGM Resorts... and MGM films... and MGM anything else.
MGM Resorts blew a golden opportunity here.
They COULD have taken actions that would not have shown legal responsibility for the acts of that moron that killed so many, but would have done wonders for their public image.
Just for one example, they could have, say, set up a college fund for the children of those killed or disabled as a result of the attack.
But instead, just like Gellatly, they insist on refusing to take ANY responsibility for anything negative that ever happens under any circumstances… even when the buck stops at the top. (And that, come to think of it, is ANOTHER Gellatly failure: HE is the chair, God Help US; EVERYTHING THAT HAPPENS IS HIS RESPONSIBILITY.)
I seriously doubt that the law they're quoting will apply to this case; it was not meant for this kind of situation, unless, for example, the MGM people can prove a link between the shooter and some recognized terrorist outfit.
Further, the law applies only to those who "The idea was that companies might not introduce new security technologies designed to thwart terrorist attacks if the companies would then face expensive — and potentially business-ending — lawsuits when those technologies fail to stop killings."
Talk about a Hail Mary. A blind horse could see in a minute that such is not what MGM Resorts does for a living.
In the Army, we would frequently comment on troops who got into trouble: "I hope the screwing he got is worth the screwing he's GONNA get."
This is a case of that.
There's so many different, positive ways MGM could have dealt with this, ways that would have earned them hundreds of millions of dollars worth of free, positive publicity.
That's not what happened here, however and I do believe they will suffer accordingly for it... as they should.