Chris Langone's Explanation

[the masked drummer]

Chris doesn't have time to answer our uneducated questions at this point. He's moved on to bigger and better things by now. Probably working on his new book. It's doubtful he'll accept any defeat regarding this issue. It's only degrees of winning for he and his career. Edited July 15, 2010 by the masked drummer

[1-0-0-1-0-0-1]

QUOTE (circumstantial tree @ Jul 15 2010, 05:50 PM)

10 User(s) are reading this topic (2 Guests and 2 Anonymous Users): CygXanTor, LiquidSteel, safetygirl2112, chrislangone, PariahDog, spacement Chris, what is the status of your suit?

It's wrinkled and needs dry cleaning. He's got a snappy tie, though.

[wibblet]

I can not find any case filed in Cook County Circuit Court by a Christopher Langone since 2008. One case in 2 1/2 years? Sounds like a really lucrative practice! (o:

 

Seriously....

 

Case number or it never happened.

 

[safetygirl2112]

QUOTE (wibblet @ Jul 15 2010, 05:43 PM)

I can not find any case filed in Cook County Circuit Court by a Christopher Langone since 2008. One case in 2 1/2 years? Sounds like a really lucrative practice! (o: Seriously.... Case number or it never happened.

He said in an earlier post (I had to skim thru page after page of BS to find) that he hadn't "served" Rush yet. Wish he would come back and give an update. Yo, Chris! You got some splainin' to do!

[the masked drummer]

QUOTE (wibblet @ Jul 15 2010, 05:43 PM)

I can not find any case filed in Cook County Circuit Court by a Christopher Langone since 2008. One case in 2 1/2 years? Sounds like a really lucrative practice! (o: Seriously.... Case number or it never happened.

I'm sure he's been involved in many international cases, not just local ones. There must be some logical explanation, much like the explanation Chris is going to grant us once he has time to actually "type" while he's logged on to this board.

In other news... HI CHRIS!

[wibblet]

Edited July 15, 2010 by wibblet

[safetygirl2112]

[danielmclark]

Chris, between your quote and your reply, you managed to post 2,241 words which could have been reduced to this:

 

"Sorry for the misunderstanding and the way this thread devolved into political sniping for a little while. Won't happen again."

 

You have yet to address any of the concerns that have been raised up to this point. How about you start with the fact that because the show was rescheduled, you have no case?

[chrislangone]

QUOTE (CygXanTor @ Jul 15 2010, 03:54 PM)

I do have one question, and I'm not sure if this has been addressed, so please forgive my ignorance; What advantage is there in purchasing tickets from a broker such as StubHub? Seeme like our friend Chris could have avoided this whole mess if he had gone straight to TM...

No problem CygXanTor, I think this is an important point. I went through Stub Hub because the show was sold out. I did not know I would possibly be in Chicago at the time tickets went on sale. Then, I found out I had to go Chicago on other business in July. I had some flexibility in scheduling my other business, so when I saw RUSH was going to be there in early July I arranged my other trip around the tour date, but it was too late to get tickets from Ticketmaster or Live Nation. I used Stub Hub, but I could have just as easily used TicketsNow, or Craigslist, as others have done. When Live Nation creates a situation whereby I could have "avoided this situation by going straight to TM" (which they now own), it has potential anti-competitive effects in the ticket sales marketplace.

 

Do people really think that there is no role for ticket exchange services such as Stub Hub, TicketsNow and Craigslist, especially when tickets may sell out before people decide to buy (for whatever reason)

[chrislangone]

QUOTE (danielmclark @ Jul 15 2010, 11:25 PM)

Chris, between your quote and your reply, you managed to post 2,241 words which could have been reduced to this: "Sorry for the misunderstanding and the way this thread devolved into political sniping for a little while. Won't happen again." You have yet to address any of the concerns that have been raised up to this point. How about you start with the fact that because the show was rescheduled, you have no case?

I thought my 2241 word post addresses that (one reason I quoted it is because I thought it might have gotten lost int he political side show). I also wanted to make clear that I was not the one who started the "politics" and note that I have already said I'm sorry about the poltical sniping and I wouldn't happen again.

 

To say I have not addressed "any of the concerns" that have been raised is not accurate. One of the most frequently voiced concerns related to the issue of Stub Hub, my 2241 word post addresses that extensively.

 

That same post also begins to address the rescheduled date issue.

 

My point, as concisely as possible: I do not think rescheduling is an adeqaute remedy for breach of contract. The contract is for a particular date, which is a material term of the contract. People enter into the contract in reliance on performance on the the particular date. If performance cannot be rendered on the date promised (whether for good or bad reasons - justified or not) then their is breach of the material terms and the non-breaching party is entitled to foreseeable damages including the price paid for the ticket.

 

I really don't see this as controversial. For instance, the reporing on the law-suit was re-reported on Pollstar:(http://www.pollstar.com/blogs/news/archive/2010/07/13/731589.aspx#bottom.

 

Here was the first comment made in response to the more-accurately reported version of the story:

 

(By ElPerro) Ticket-sellers should be required by law to immediately refund not only the ticket value, but all parking and "convenience" fees in case of a cancellation or change of date. It is my understanding that Ticketmaster has always refunded 100%. But I don't know if they still do, now that they have joined the Live Nation Evil Empire. I can tell you from personal experience that MusicToday DOES NOT give you back your service charges in case of a cancellation, they only give you back the face value of the tickets. Keep this in mind next time you are tempted to buy tickets through them. Bastiges.

 

To the consipracy theorists that may be out there, I am not "El Perro" (he/she is obviously more concise than me). But this sentiment captures the legal basis of my suit exactly: "Ticket sellers should be required by law to immediately refund ... in case ... of change of date."

 

A resheduling is not adeqaute, especially if people cannot make the re-scheduled date.

 

Some have suggested - yea, well just resell on Stub Hub -- but this contradicts the view that people should not be using Stub Hub and if they do they deserve what they get.

 

 

[Snaked]

Chris,

 

 

This is my last post until you address the actual issues at hand here.

 

 

1. Have you contacted StubHub since the announcement of a rescheduled date to see if they will offer any relief?

 

2. What is the case number?

 

 

 

Anything to do with LiveNation, TicketMaster or any other entity is moot at this point considering you NEVER entered into an agreement with those agencies or any of their authorized agents. You made a purchase from STUBHUB. That is the only body we're interested at this point since THEY are the ones who can offer you relief.

 

 

 

LiveNation dosent have YOUR money.

They have money from the individual who originally bought the tickets.

They dont know you from Adam.

They have ZERO obligation to assist you in securing a refund for your purchase.

 

 

[Alex]

Chris:

 

What about disclaimers or fine print? Do those become invalid simply because they are not in plain sight but merely on the back of the ticket?

Edited July 16, 2010 by Alex

[chrislangone]

QUOTE (PariahDog @ Jul 15 2010, 04:25 PM)

With the show rescheduled, I really don't understand why you are still suing.   I'm sure you can sell your tickets on StubHub for at least what you paid.  In fact, you can probably get a premuim as these are the infamous Chris Langone Lawsuit tickets. But I guess that's not good enough, and you still want compensation for "travel costs to the show, and out of pocket losses" (your original post). I'd be very interested to know what these costs are, if not airfare and beers as you say.  Is it really worth a class action lawsuit at this point?

PariahDog - I may have to try to sell the tickets on Stub Hub. That is what the recent email they sent ticketholders says people must do. But this contradicts what they told me on the telephone when I asked for a refund - at that time they stated they follow Live Nation's policy.

 

Now that Live Nation has altered its policy (in possible response to media reports of the suit - their recent offer totally contradicts what is written on the ticket) - Stub Hub may attempt to back-track on their promise to me - that remains to be seen.

 

Also, I wanted to thank you for some particularly informative posts in this thread. I know you don't agree with my approach, but you have been very respectful and rational in your approach. Who knows, maybe one of us will convice the other, or maybe at the end we will just have to settle on agreeing to disagree.

 

Let me ask you a question - I did a little research on the Yes/Peter Frampton suit you mentioned and posted pix of collapsed stage. Clearly that performance of that show was rendered impossible due to the wind storm collapsing the stage (impossibility of performance is a potential defense to a contract suit), but while impossibility of performance excuses a party from incidental and consequential damages, they still need to make restitution for the benefits conferred on them (i.e. return the ticket price. My question to you is, do you think people who cannot make the resheduled YES/Frampton date should receive a refund?

 

See the following link for a summary of the doctrine of the defense of impossibility of performance:

 

http://www.west.net/~smith/imposbl.htm

Edited July 16, 2010 by chrislangone

[chrislangone]

QUOTE (Snaked @ Jul 15 2010, 04:33 PM)

Funniest part of the whole thing is he STILL isnt addressing the real issues. It's typical lawyer distraction bullshit. We ask a question and his response is "Hey!  Look over there!! It's a blimp!" Chris, I will say this again. Your purchase agreement is with StubHub. Not TicketMaster. Not LiveNation. Not RUSH. StubHub was not hired to be an agent for any of those entities in regards to this matter. Please tell us what action you have taken in regards to STUBHUB since the announcement of the show being rescheduled. And please refrain from bringing up TicketsNow.com or any other agency which truly has no bearing on this discussion. TicketsNow.com was never contracted by you or anybody else in regards to your purchase. Their policies have zero bearing on the matter at hand.

Snaked: I am still in the process of dealing with Stub Hub. I hope my last few posts address this concern adequately.

 

Also, let me again try to clarify the nature of a class action. I am suing not only for myself, but others "similarly-situated." The fact that others may have bought through Craigslist, or TicketsNow, are similarly situated in that they have purchased through third-party sellers. It is reasonably forseeable to Live Nation/Ticketmaster that people will do this (esp given Ticketmaster explicitly endorses one of them). So the purpose of the observation re: TicketsNow was to point out that Ticketmaster uses such services. Early in this thread people were commenting to the effect - you deserve what you get for using a quasi-legal scalping service etc. One poster noted there are advertisments even within venues for theses services and a discussion surrounding whether LiveNation/Ticketmaster endorse them. So I was attempting to shed some light on that.

 

Also notable is that TicketsNow is a sponsoring link of the RIAB forum. So I am assuming that some fans/subcribers on that board used TicketsNow - should they be screwed and denied their money back because they used that service?

 

So I respectfully disagree with your view that facts and practices regarding those other entities is irrelvant.

 

Also, a ticket is a license that confers rights on the holder, regardless of the means by which they become a holder. So its not a question of whether Stub Hub is an agent of Live Nation, but rather Live Nation is liable for damages for its breach of the contract/license when it is in fact reasonably foreseeable that people will use those agencies.

 

 

Edited July 16, 2010 by chrislangone

[Snaked]

You're bound by the terms of the agreement you enter into at the time of purchase.

 

If you were unaware of STUBHUB's policy regarding rescheduled events the onus lays squarely on YOUR shoulders. Ignorance is no defense.. especially when the terms of the agreement you are about to enter into are so clearly stated.

 

 

If you were unhappy with STUBHUB's policy regarding rescheduled events you should not have purchased tickets from them.

 

 

 

Oh, and again you have failed to post the case number so we can look up the filing.

[chrislangone]

QUOTE (Alex @ Jul 15 2010, 11:48 PM)

Chris: What about disclaimers or fine print? Do those become invalid simply because they are not in plain sight but merely on the back of the ticket?

Alex - the law on the enforcability of disclaimers/fine print is extensive and complicated. Depending on a variety of factors those kinds of exculpatory clauses are sometimes enforced, sometimes not. For a variety of reasons in this case we feel we have good legal arguments that such limitations do not prevent the remedies requested.

 

In that regard, one prior poster noted I should "follow the rules." I am. The rules are the statutes and common law, not merely what a company decides to write in its fine print.

 

I am sure you, like many, have rented a car. And if you had to stand behind the person that was sitting there for an hour reading it all and trying to negotiate it you would be calling them the kinds of names I have been called in the Counterparts forum. So that is the point, because these terms are not negotiated at arms-length and the consumer is not given an opportunity to negotiate the terms they don't get the kind of legal respect that actually-negotiated contractual terms do. (Not to say they are irrelevant - just not the be-all/end-all by any means"

Edited July 16, 2010 by chrislangone

[chrislangone]

So I hoped I've typed enough tonight to satisfy maskeddrummer (Masket Rider was a great book, BTW)

 

My last comment tonight is, as concert goers and music lovers don't you think its about time for us to stand up to unfair and deceptive practices by music promoters and companies like TicketMaster (that people routinely refer to as Ticket-bastard).

 

Just throwing up our hands and saying "sh** happens" only allows them to get away with more BS. I'm sure you all love that $9.00 parking fee that Live Nation builds into every ticket purchased regardless of whether you walk, take a taxi, don't park in their lot, or go 4 in a car (and thus jointly pay $36 for one "parking spot"). But I guess if they write it on the ticket then you need to accept it, or just don't go to shows, right?

 

Well I don't accept it. One person asked was it worth all the namecalling, etc. - so far, yes - I think so. I don't give much credit to the name-callers anyway, and some of thise was really due to some misimpressions created by the news reports as to what was/is really going on.

 

We as consumers, music-lovers, concert goers and fans have rights, regardless of the fact most people are not aware of them. I am trying (exclusively through my posts in this forum) to try to see if I can make some small difference in helping people become a little more informed about the rights conferred upon them by our legal system.

Edited July 16, 2010 by chrislangone

[RUSHHEAD666]

QUOTE (chrislangone @ Jul 15 2010, 10:12 PM)

QUOTE (Alex @ Jul 15 2010, 11:48 PM) Chris: What about disclaimers or fine print? Do those become invalid simply because they are not in plain sight but merely on the back of the ticket? Alex - the law on the enforcability of disclaimers/fine print is extensive and complicated. Depending on a variety of factors those kinds of exculpatory clauses are sometimes enforced, sometimes not. For a variety of reasons in this case we feel we have good legal arguments that such limitations do not prevent the remedies requests.   In that regard, one prior poster noted I should "follow the rules." I am. The rules are the statutes and common law, not merely what a company decides to write in its fine print.   I am sure you, like many, have rented a car. And if you had to stand behind the person that was sitting there for an hour reading it all and trying to negotiate it you would be calling them the kinds of names I have been called in the Counterparts forum. So that is the point, because these terms are not negotiated at arms-length and the consumer is not given an opportunity to negotiate the terms they don't get the kind of legal respect that actually-negotiated contractual terms do. (Not to say they are irrelevant - just not the be-all/end-all by any means" Hey Chris!   You seem to be a very intelligent guy. Do you really think you will still win this case? I think it's null and void. Then again what do I know about law?   After reading through your many posts, I need to go "Back To School."   Signed,   Rodney Dangerfield

[chrislangone]

QUOTE (RUSHHEAD666 @ Jul 16 2010, 12:38 AM)

Hey Chris! You seem to be a very intelligent guy. Do you really think you will still win this case? I think it's null and void.  Then again what do I know about law? After reading through your many posts, I need to go "Back To School." Signed, Rodney Dangerfield

Ok - one more comment tonight, since I saw this:

 

Thanks for the compliment. I think most RUSH fans are intelligent given the sophistication of the lyrics, etc - that's one of the things that first attracted me to the band when I was a kid. I had cmade a comment to this effect (i.e., that RUSH fans tend to be more intelligent) one response in Counterparts was as follows:

 

"No we're not. We are a disparate group of fuckwits, retards, fanbois and OCD sufferers that gripe and groan at Rush's every turn..."

 

It was after reading that that I decided I would limit my discussion on this issue to this forum (where the admins, who have been repeatedly thanked for the good job they are doing) have kept things on track.

 

I know emotions run high, as we all care about this band, what it does and the music it makes. And sometimes emotions prevent people from seeing things clearly. This is why juries are repeatedly instructed to keep emotions out when deciding the case.

 

I really don't think I am any more intelligent than anyone else in this forum. I just happened to have been trained in law. And notwithstanding some snide comments that I should sue my law school for not teaching me law well enough, I do think I will win the case. If I didn't think so I would not have filed it.

 

I don't think we are fuckwits, retards, fanbois and OCD sufferers - I think we are stadium-fillers who shouldn't be screwed over by the people that profit from the fact that we fill their concert halls.

Edited July 16, 2010 by chrislangone

[RUSHHEAD666]

[The Slanny Ganizat]

[RUSHHEAD666]

[Some Half-Forgotten Stranger]

I thought this situation got settled?

 

Edited for crappy proof reading skills.

Edited July 16, 2010 by Some Half-Forgotten Stranger

[GhostGirl]

QUOTE (The Slanny Ganizat @ Jul 16 2010, 01:22 AM)

"Arguing on the internet is a lot like the special olympics. Even if you win, you're still retarded." (No offense to the special olympics or its participants...)

I'll get slammed for taking this thread off topic, but I can't help it.

 

You can't post something like this, followed by "no offense" and think that makes it okay. Sorry, you just can't. The offense is already made.

 

Yes, I have a child with special needs (including mental retardation) and I can't help it if I seem un-PC, I just HATE seeing jokes like this used so casually.

 

Again, I'm sorry for going off topic. A hard night of dealing with my son, only to see this in a thread this morning was just more than I could take.

[Lerxster]

You claimed you filed a lawsuit, yet that does not appear to be true. Have you actually filed yet? If not, why on earth would you announce to the world that you have sued Rush when in actuality you have not?

 

According to you, it was neither raining nor was it shining when the concert was called off. Case closed. You're welcome Robert Farmer.