The skit that “missed the mark” occurred in a break in play during the second quarter of Charlotte’s game against the Philadelphia 76ers on Monday. The child was brought onto the court with Hugo, the Hornets’ mascot, dressed as Santa Claus. After a letter to Santa requesting a PS5 was read out loud, a cheerleader came out with a bag containing the video game console.

The young fan was visibly overjoyed as he received the pricy gift. However, according to an online acquaintance, he was less happy when the cameras turned off and a Hornets staffer took it away, replacing it with a jersey.

You are viewing a single thread.
View all comments
102 points

That’s called theft. Legally a gift is irrevocable once it’s given.

permalink
report
reply
16 points
*

IANAL Warning

Indeed, there was a story a while back where a bar had a contest for their staff; Whoever could sell the most drinks would receive a new Toyota.

Well one woman who really needed a new car busted her ass for that, and was taking to a parking lot where she was given a stuffed toy of Yoda from Star Wars; a “Toy Yoda”

She was told it was a joke and there was never any realistic chance of some local pub giving away new cars to minimum wage staff.

Well she sued over this joke, and actually won because during the contest she specifically asked what kind of Toyota it was and was told by her supervisor; the one who started the contest in the first place. That it very specifically was a real car that would be paid for in full and put in her name at no cost to her. Which invalidated any claim to this being a gag or a hoax.

You can imply that the prize is whatever you want it to be, and give whatever you want the prize to be. But the second you specify what the prize is in no unsubtle terms, you have to give it.

It’s why I can say in a public ad that if you show up to my house wearing a Ballerina Outfit and a Cowboy Hat, and then knock on the door in the rhythm of the BGM “Bloody Tears”, I will give you 100 Grand. You have no case if I hand you a candy bar literally called 100 Grand.

But if I said “That’s right, one hundred thousand dollars in cash!”, that wouldn’t fly and you can take me to court.

But If I stayed on message and only said 100 Grand, using THAT exact phrasing, especially if I make other misleading but accurate claims like it being “100 Grand, yeah that’s something to really sink your teeth into” then what I’m doing is hillarious.

By putting the PS5 Box in the kid’s hands and saying he won a Playstation, that ended any ambiguity, taking away the box and giving him a Jersey was an act of fraud.

permalink
report
parent
reply
7 points

She was told it was a joke and there was never any realistic chance of some local pub giving away new cars to minimum wage staff.

I remember that story. It wasn’t a local pub, it was a Hooters. Hooters is an enormous nationwide chain that could easily afford a Camry.

permalink
report
parent
reply
4 points

Hooters? Fuck I was told it was just some pub, that makes it 5000 times worse

permalink
report
parent
reply
7 points

He was given an empty box for show, letting him keep it wouldn’t make it any better.

permalink
report
parent
reply
-85 points
*

They never intended on giving the kid the gift. If they allowed them to go home with the PS5, and then requested it back the next day, then the family would have a good argument that ownership was transferred to them. This was just a bad joke.

Edit: on lemmy.world it’s like I never left reddit!

permalink
report
parent
reply
5 points

Don’t be defensive. I didn’t downvote you, but when you pull false claims out of your ass that make no sense, that’s going to happen…

permalink
report
parent
reply
-2 points

How is my claim false?

permalink
report
parent
reply
15 points

Intent matters but not if the intent was to deceive. If the act had all the elements that represent giving a gift, then legally it WAS giving a gift. Otherwise all gifts could be taken back at any time just by claiming that it was actually a joke.

permalink
report
parent
reply
44 points

Why would the act of going home change the legality? Or intent?

If i take a $20 bill and hand it to a stranger in front of witnesses and say, “Here you go, this is a gift.”

If in 5 mins, I snatch that bill back and walk away. That’s legal? Because he didn’t touch his house first, and I never had intent to give a gift?

permalink
report
parent
reply
11 points

It’s like a game of tag, once an item is exchanged you best start running home!

permalink
report
parent
reply
85 points

That’s utter nonsense. A gift only counts if you make it home with the gift? Where did you come up with that?

permalink
report
parent
reply
-9 points

Gift law

The donor of the gift must have a present intent to make a gift of the property to the donee

Intent needs to be proven or it’s not a gift. They did not intend on giving a gift.

permalink
report
parent
reply
16 points

I’m guessing it’s based on the rules of the schoolyard game to run from one side of a field to the other while avoiding the corporate bullies in the center.

permalink
report
parent
reply

Not The Onion

!nottheonion@lemmy.world

Create post

Welcome

We’re not The Onion! Not affiliated with them in any way! Not operated by them in any way! All the news here is real!

The Rules

Posts must be:

  1. Links to news stories from…
  2. …credible sources, with…
  3. …their original headlines, that…
  4. …would make people who see the headline think, “That has got to be a story from The Onion, America’s Finest News Source.”

Comments must abide by the server rules for Lemmy.world and generally abstain from trollish, bigoted, or otherwise disruptive behavior that makes this community less fun for everyone.

And that’s basically it!

Community stats

  • 7.4K

    Monthly active users

  • 1.1K

    Posts

  • 40K

    Comments

Community moderators