Slashdot Mirror
RadioShack Puts Customer Data Up For Sale In Bankruptcy Auction
itwbennett writes For years, RadioShack made a habit of collecting customers' contact information at checkout. Now, the bankrupt retailer is putting that data on the auction block. A list of RadioShack assets for sale includes more than 65 million customer names and physical addresses, and 13 million email addresses. Bloomberg reports that the asset sale may include phone numbers and information on shopping habits as well. New York's Attorney General says his office will take 'appropriate action' if the data is handed over.
Free shitty batteries.
I bought lots of stuff off of RadioShack back in ye olden days. Two computers (an MC-10 and a CoCo3), several game ROMs, two printers, a one-sided floppy drive, OS/9 level 2, and dozens of doo-dads for various projects.
So yeah, if RadioShack wants to sell the fact that I bought a TP-10 thermal printer back in 1983, then go to town!
The world's burning. Moped Jesus spotted on I50. Details at 11.
Nope. I paid for the products and they have no right to search me.
Even at Costco, if the line is too long, I just walk out without letting them search me.
Peter predicted that you would "deliberately forget" creation 2000 years ago...
Not illegal if they informed you that last time they did a refund that you were now an exception to the policy. There's nothing in Canadian law requiring a company to provide a refund, assuming they didn't defraud you in some fashion.
Many states, including my home state of WV, have "stand your ground" laws where the bar to use deadly force is very low.
My understanding of the concept of "Stand Your Ground" is that it does not define the conditions upon which deadly force may be used. Different concepts, for example the "Castle Doctrine", define such conditions. Under the "Castle Doctrine" a person is by law considered to be in danger of death or severe bodily injury if a stranger forces his way into their home. That forcible entry into the home enables the use of deadly force. What "Stand Your Ground" adds to such concepts is whether the person is obligated to flee. Does the person enabled to use deadly force under the "Castle Doctrine" have to attempt to flee if possible to do so. "Stand Your Ground" merely say that they have no such obligation to flee.
Be aware that "Stand Your Ground" is being grossly misrepresented in the media. Partly through the normal day to day ignorance of the media (*) and partly through politics.
(*) Consider the media's abysmal coverage and discussion of anything computer related. What makes you think they do any better on any other subject matter?