3 ms·
> I'm pretty sure with any brick and mortar business, as a business owner you are legally allowed to disallow service to anyone without having to provide a reas
by munk-a 7y ago
> I'm pretty sure with any brick and mortar business, as a business owner you are legally allowed to disallow service to anyone without having to provide a reason.
It depends, you aren't allowed to restrict access for privileged reasons (i.e. banning all black people from your business is a clear case of discrimination and is specifically illegal), but otherwise you have a lot of levity to refuse persons entry - but that "without having to provide a reason" is just apparent because it is very infrequently challenged - if someone feels they were wrongly refused service they absolutely have the right to sue and require you to state why that ban took place, but, as your business is owned by you a ban made by you is legal until overturned, either early (as in a preliminary injection) or as a result (after the ruling on a case).
It's hard to pull real world analogies for this case, as well, since Amazon is never worried about other customers being dissuaded from a purchase because I'm shopping in my boxers, or am shouting and creating an unsafe environment - so there's a limit to how well you could tune a real world example to this scenario... but I might give it a try with this:
I run an absolutely 'grammable business, there's bubbly pink champagne and gold everywhere - including the stoop. I like to use that fancy stoop to attract new customers but I've been a bit concerned lately that a city tour guide has regularly been bringing around their tour and they're taking selfies of my business from across the street - that tour guide is profiting from the decoration I've put into my stoop and some of those tourists might've been willing to pay the modest 300$ fee to walk in and take selfies inside! So I try to get the city to restrict the tour guide from being able to lead his tourists to take selfies from across the street. It's very possible I could remove the glitzy decorations from my stoop but that would impair my advertising, which I don't want to do - instead I want to legally restrict people from using my stoop in a manner I did not intend.
I think that's pretty apt in a few ways but it also misses the fact that LinkedIn is technically paying a bit of money every time someone loads a page - and if the tour guide was noticeably damaging my stoop I would be able to sue him for damages and probably win, but the cost of that page load is so utterly negligible that maybe we can ignore it.