tOffical all things Sterling thread

[True Lakers Fan]

One more thing - Blake Griffin stated today that he realizes it might take some time, but does not know what he will do if new ownership of the Clippers is not in place by the time the new season starts and indicated that he might not play, so while Sterling is trying to sue the NBA - he will also have to sue his players for refusing to get on the court and play and remember - he could officially retire and avoid the breach of contract charge. The money he has already earned gives him that luxary.

 

[True Lakers Fan]

I will add that the freedom of speech is sometimes irrelevent due to overwhelming public opinion and the circumstances. For example on this message board, the owner which is Hammer owns all of the proprietary rights and as result anyone who posts in here is by his permission. That means he has the right to list the rules and tell you what you can say and what you can't. He also can change those rules and do what he wants. It goes without saying that if he went overboard, he would end up without posters and lose his advertising, just as the paying fans and sponsers have the right to boycott the Clippers next season. So while you can say what you want - there are others who have the right to not do business with you or patronize your services and you end up unemployed. That is the pressure of public opinion

In Sterling's case, he said what he wanted in private and never meant for his personal opinion to be exposed, but the fact that the conversation was illegally recorded is now irrelevent because his opinion is out there in public domain and the entire NBA now believes that he is a racist and that his racist views are not compatible with the NBA and when each owner signed an agreement, they agreed in principle to subject themselves to the other governings and abide by their binding arbitration. Very few courts are going to go far to help Sterling and in fact I think most judges will look at Sterling's statements and the evidence indicating the harm it will due to the NBA and refuse to intervene. My point is this: there is a time to speak and a time to be silent. and sometimes you simply have to back off and leave others alone - not for them, but for your own best interests.

 

[trojanfan12]

In the world where each owner was required to sign away their rights to sue in court to begin with

Atleast that's what it comes down to because before you are allowed to own a team, you have to sign contracts. One of them is that you agree to be subject to the system of justice dictated and written by the board of directors, another is a moral clause that disallows you from taking a position that is contrary or detrimental to the benefit of the NBA. There are other contracts that allows the NBA to decide the fate of your team in the NBA for failing to live up to those contracts. Sterling owns the team only as long as he follows the rules - He violated those rights - it might take a few months or longer but he is going to lose eventually

And yet, this is going to court. So, apparently you are living in a different world than the rest of us.

 

[JDM]

We will see, but right now ESPN is making fun of him - He did finally hire a lawyer after 8 of the most prestigiou law firms turned him down, but the attorney is five years older than Sterling, so we will see if Sterling's lawyer is senile as well. My guess, however is that the attorney will know what he is doing

Note: Remember from the beginning I have said the best weapon the NBA has are the sponsers refusing to pay for advertise and the fans refusing to come see the games. I believe the NBA could simply contract the Clippers out of existence and let Sterling sue. A year long battle in court and no games scheduled to play, absence of sponsers and no fans will really wreck Donald Sterling

Guaranteed if the league doesn't schedule games there is an injunction forcing them to do so.

 

[trojanfan12]

I will add that the freedom of speech is sometimes irrelevent due to overwhelming public opinion and the circumstances. For example on this message board, the owner which is Hammer owns all of the proprietary rights and as result anyone who posts in here is by his permission. That means he has the right to list the rules and tell you what you can say and what you can't. He also can change those rules and do what he wants. It goes without saying that if he went overboard, he would end up without posters and lose his advertising, just as the paying fans and sponsers have the right to boycott the Clippers next season. So while you can say what you want - there are others who have the right to not do business with you or patronize your services and you end up unemployed. That is the pressure of public opinion

In Sterling's case, he said what he wanted in private and never meant for his personal opinion to be exposed, but the fact that the conversation was illegally recorded is now irrelevent because his opinion is out there in public domain and the entire NBA now believes that he is a racist and that his racist views are not compatible with the NBA and when each owner signed an agreement, they agreed in principle to subject themselves to the other governings and abide by their binding arbitration. Very few courts are going to go far to help Sterling and in fact I think most judges will look at Sterling's statements and the evidence indicating the harm it will due to the NBA and refuse to intervene. My point is this: there is a time to speak and a time to be silent. and sometimes you simply have to back off and leave others alone - not for them, but for your own best interests.

One thing and only one thing matters in all of this. That is whether or not the NBA can legally take his team. The NBA and it's lawyers believe that they can. Donald Sterling and his lawyers believe they can't.

Legal experts are divided on this as well. For every legal expert out there that says the NBA has a strong case, there is another who says Sterling has a strong case. That's why it's going to court.

Additionally, the Sterlings have what is being called the "nuclear option" which is this: If Shelly Sterling files for divorce (and according to reports, the papers are already signed) then this goes to the California Family Law court and the assets get frozen so that absolutely nothing can be done with the Clippers by the Sterlings OR the NBA. In fact, many legal analysts believe that this is the card that the Sterlings will play if it looks like the decision isn't going to go their way.

As I've been saying, this isn't going to be decided any time soon.

 

[True Lakers Fan]

And yet, this is going to court. So, apparently you are living in a different world than the rest of us.

Well actually it hasn't went to court yet, so you can't say that. Just because Sterling has threatened to sue and says he is going to sue - does not mean he will prevail. It may get thrown out as quickly as he files. There are very few experts that believes he will - if you have been paying attention. Much will depend on the language of the constitution that the board of governors have not released in it's entirety and so far the only thing we do know is that they say they can vote him out with 75% of the vote. Can vote as in they have the power - as in he agreed to that from the beginning

 

[True Lakers Fan]

One thing and only one thing matters in all of this. That is whether or not the NBA can legally take his team. The NBA and it's lawyers believe that they can. Donald Sterling and his lawyers believe they can't.

Legal experts are divided on this as well. For every legal expert out there that says the NBA has a strong case, there is another who says Sterling has a strong case. That's why it's going to court.

Additionally, the Sterlings have what is being called the "nuclear option" which is this: If Shelly Sterling files for divorce (and according to reports, the papers are already signed) then this goes to the California Family Law court and the assets get frozen so that absolutely nothing can be done with the Clippers by the Sterlings OR the NBA. In fact, many legal analysts believe that this is the card that the Sterlings will play if it looks like the decision isn't going to go their way.

As I've been saying, this isn't going to be decided any time soon.

Donald Sterling hired an 85 year old lawyer who may have be out of touch with reality more than Sterling and Sterling has lost touch with reality if believes his team will prevail as it has this year with him in charge. It won't - the Clippers will collapse and losetens of millions of dollars in revenue if not over hundreds of millions - thats the reason they governors are going to go forward. In business the wife is always half of the enterprise even when the business is a corporation when the two have built their enterprise together like that. She can file for divorce, but by association for 33 years she has dug herself into the same hole

 

[trojanfan12]

Well actually it hasn't went to court yet, so you can't say that. Just because Sterling has threatened to sue and says he is going to sue - does not mean he will prevail. It may get thrown out as quickly as he files. There are very few experts that believes he will - if you have been paying attention. Much will depend on the language of the constitution that the board of governors have not released in it's entirety and so far the only thing we do know is that they say they can vote him out with 75% of the vote. Can vote as in they have the power - as in he agreed to that from the beginning

You do understand that going to court implies that it hasn't happened yet, right? Btw, the letter they sent the NBA is a letter that is the normal pre-cursor to a lawsuit.

 

[trojanfan12]

Donald Sterling hired an 85 year old lawyer who may have be out of touch with reality more than Sterling and Sterling has lost touch with reality if believes his team will prevail as it has this year with him in charge. It won't - the Clippers will collapse and losetens of millions of dollars in revenue if not over hundreds of millions - thats the reason they governors are going to go forward. In business the wife is always half of the enterprise even when the business is a corporation when the two have built their enterprise together like that. She can file for divorce, but by association for 33 years she has dug herself into the same hole

I will just allow the stupidity of this post to speak for itself.

 

[True Lakers Fan]

I will just allow the stupidity of this post to speak for itself.

What can I say - If I respond -then you will ban me like you did the others. Sterling will be removed from the Clippers though - Just because he will try to sue them - does not mean he will be successful

 

[True Lakers Fan]

By the way - in the latest release by your intelligent hero(Donald Sterling), He says he pushed the record button and he is the one that recorded the conversation. It was also noted that anything you say can be used against you in a court of law. The only time this is not the case is in a criminal investigation. The individuals interrogating you must inform you of your constitutional rights. This isn't the case though - this is going to be a civil matter if it goes that far. From everything that has been said, the owners do have the power to vote Sterling out. I would propose that the reason they have not done that yet is because they are exploring other options and are hoping they can talk Sterling into selling the team voluntarily

 

[trojanfan12]

What can I say - If I respond -then you will ban me like you did the others. Sterling will be removed from the Clippers though - Just because he will try to sue them - does not mean he will be successful

I have never banned anyone or even requested that anyone be banned. Just because you get called out for posting something stupid, doesn't mean you have to be childish in your response. It was a stupid post, period.

2nd, I never said he would be successful, I said he would sue and it will be decided in court and that is exactly what appears to be happening.

 

[trojanfan12]

By the way - in the latest release by your intelligent hero(Donald Sterling), He says he pushed the record button and he is the one that recorded the conversation. It was also noted that anything you say can be used against you in a court of law. The only time this is not the case is in a criminal investigation. The individuals interrogating you must inform you of your constitutional rights. This isn't the case though - this is going to be a civil matter if it goes that far. From everything that has been said, the owners do have the power to vote Sterling out. I would propose that the reason they have not done that yet is because they are exploring other options and are hoping they can talk Sterling into selling the team voluntarily

Oh, I see. Everything I've said would happen is happening and that makes Sterling my hero. I have never said that I want him to win or keep the team, I have simply doubted the NBA's ability to legally take his team. From an emotional perspective (the one you are operating under), I hope he loses in court. However, looking at it logically, the NBA's case doesn't appear to be the slam dunk that people want it to be. So, how about you just stop embarrassing yourself with idiotic accusations like Sterling being my hero?

Where's your link that Sterling said he pushed record? The only thing that I've read is that V. Stiviano (or whatever her real name is) said that he had asked to start having his conversations recorded because of memory issues. Whether he pushed record or not, doesn't matter. The fact is that it was a private conversation that was made public without his consent.

As for the owner's ability to vote him out. That is under the NBA's constitution and by-laws. I have never questioned the owners ability to vote him out under NBA by-laws. I have questioned whether or not they can legally take his team and have maintained that it will be decided in court. Which is exactly where this seems to be headed, whether you like it or not.

It's also not a slam dunk that the other owners will vote him out. In fact, I'd bet that there are a few that hope this just goes straight to court and they aren't forced to vote. The only leg that the NBA has to stand on is it's morals clause. Well, I'd be willing to bet that a few of these owners have some things in their pasts that could get them ousted over a morals clause as well. As Mark Cuban pointed out, anything that these owners do to Sterling, can be done to them as well.

Not sure what part of "state and federal courts don't care what the NBA's constitution and by-laws say, they only care what the law says" that you don't understand.

This appears headed for court because the NBA's lawyers and Donald Sterlings lawyers have a different interpretation of how well the NBA's by-laws hold up under state and federal law. Because of this difference in interpretation, a court will make the final decision. Which all that I have said all along.

End of the day, I couldn't care less if Sterling keeps the team or not. He 's been banned for life. Letting him keep the team might be a worse punishment anyway. Think about it, it's been reported that his main interest in owning the Clippers is that he loves being able to say that he owns a professional sports franchise. Imagine him owning the Clippers and literally being able to do nothing with them, not even attend the games or any NBA functions. It would be a bit like buying a Ferrari and then having your drivers license suspended.

 

[True Lakers Fan]

Going to court means nothing - If the owners has the power to approve of an owner before he buys a team, then they have the same power to remove an owner if he comes a threat to the team. If he players insist that they will not play one game this season if Sterling is still an ower - then the owners will have more than justification to remove him. Sterling really has no right to sue in federal court because he signed legal contracts agreeing to binding arbitration and he signed over other specific rights that circumvent the courts. The NBA is not a normal business where owners have exclusive rights of their business. In this case Sterling would allowed to keep all of his property, but clearly he does not own the NBA name and he is allowed to claim membersip of the NBA by permission which can be revoked

 

[True Lakers Fan]

Sorry, but it's a slam dunk - it's not the matter of if - it's the matter of when. One way or another Sterling is out and the Clippers cannot and will not survive next season without the support of their fans or sponsers and right now they don't even have the support of the players as long as Sterling claims to be the face of the franchise.

 

[trojanfan12]

Going to court means nothing - If the owners has the power to approve of an owner before he buys a team, then they have the same power to remove an owner if he comes a threat to the team. If he players insist that they will not play one game this season if Sterling is still an ower - then the owners will have more than justification to remove him. Sterling really has no right to sue in federal court because he signed legal contracts agreeing to binding arbitration and he signed over other specific rights that circumvent the courts. The NBA is not a normal business where owners have exclusive rights of their business. In this case Sterling would allowed to keep all of his property, but clearly he does not own the NBA name and he is allowed to claim membersip of the NBA by permission which can be revoked

Seriously?!? Your ability to embarrass yourself is pretty legendary both at cbs and here. But this one is an all-timer. You should retire now because I don't think you can possibly outdo this one.

The NBA's by-laws trump state and federal laws!!


"Fuck the U.S. Constitution and state and federal laws. It's the NBA's constitution and by-laws that we must all follow." - True Lakers Fan

 

[True Lakers Fan]

Seriously?!? Your ability to embarrass yourself is pretty legendary both at cbs and here. But this one is an all-timer. You should retire now because I don't think you can possibly outdo this one.

The NBA's by-laws trump state and federal laws!!


"Fuck the U.S. Constitution and state and federal laws. It's the NBA's constitution and by-laws that we must all follow." - True Lakers Fan

Contracts are almost always enforceble in every court - unless the contract is a violation of the current law. The NBA has numerous contracts signed and dated by Donald Sterling that spells of this out in their constitution. What you believe to be correct is contract law in business - other than major league sports which have special exemptions

 

[trojanfan12]

Contracts are almost always enforceble in every court - unless the contract is a violation of the current law. The NBA has numerous contracts signed and dated by Donald Sterling that spells of this out in their constitution. What you believe to be correct is contract law in business - other than major league sports which have special exemptions

You're trying to top your previous post, aren't you?

 

[True Lakers Fan]

You're trying to top your previous post, aren't you?

It's very simple - When the NBA was created, they also created a constitution and in that constitution, each owner agreed to the power of the board of governors, good moral clauses and binding arbitration. The top experts and lawyers in the country already have agreed on one thing - Sterling will have a tough time prevailing in court. Binding arbitration is a very tough thing to circumvent when you agreed to it legally ahead of time. Sterling agreed to when he also agreed to not take a position that would damage the NBA. Being racist is a position that hurts the league and anything you say can be used against you in a court of law. You make it sound as if I am stupid, but if that's the case Adam Silver and the other 29 other owners are also stupid because they are saying the same thing.

I find it interesting though - that you all banned montsho and Lakers+USC for calling you and the others "stupid" and yet as a moderator you appearantly believe it's okay to do the same thing. Not a professional position if you ask me.

 

[trojanfan12]

It's very simple - When the NBA was created, they also created a constitution and in that constitution, each owner agreed to the power of the board of governors, good moral clauses and binding arbitration. The top experts and lawyers in the country already have agreed on one thing - Sterling will have a tough time prevailing in court. Binding arbitration is a very tough thing to circumvent when you agreed to it legally ahead of time. Sterling agreed to when he also agreed to not take a position that would damage the NBA. Being racist is a position that hurts the league and anything you say can be used against you in a court of law. You make it sound as if I am stupid, but if that's the case Adam Silver and the other 29 other owners are also stupid because they are saying the same thing.

I find it interesting though - that you all banned montsho and Lakers+USC for calling you and the others "stupid" and yet as a moderator you appearantly believe it's okay to do the same thing. Not a professional position if you ask me.

Just so you know, I take absolutely nothing you say as being worth anything other than laughing at you. What little credibility you had was lost when you accused me of banning people and said Sterling is "my hero".

Those 2 statements show that have all of the emotional stability and logic of a teenage girl and are to be taken about as seriously.


As I said before, I have never banned anyone and I have never requested that anyone be banned.


As for mont and L+USC. Mont earned his ban. I PM'd Hammer about L+USC to find out why he had been banned and whether or not it was permanent. When Hammer asked my opinion of L+USC (because he really didn't know who he was), I said that I've posted with him since cbs and found him to be a solid poster who never had issues with anyone that I was aware of. I'm sure it had nothing to do with his returning, but I had nothing to do with him being banned.