Talk:Rubio's Fresh Mexican Grill

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Sadly, the Rubio's restaurant in Oregon is no more. I am removing Oregon from the list on this page. - gerb

[edit] "Frivolous lawsuit" characterization

I marked the "frivolous lawsuit" sentence with a "citation needed." It makes a difference whether that characterization was made by an independent and qualified observer, or by an interested party (say, a lawyer for Rubio's, or a propagandist for some legal think-tank representing corporate interests against the interests of consumer-plaintiffs). Notice that the sentence in question uses the passive voice, thereby avoiding saying who made that characterization. Bruce Tindall 00:42, 26 August 2006 (UTC)

One doesn't have to be a corporate shill to see the insanity of this lawsuit. So the lobster burritos contained squat lobster rather than clawed lubster... they still contined lobster meat. It is a strech to call what Rubios did "deceptive advertizing". But some woman with too much time on her hands goes whining to a bunch of class-action ambulance chasers and all of a sudden the rest of us have to pay more when we eat at Rubios. It may be "the way of things" but that doesn't mean we can't call a spade a spade... just my $0.02... --SpinyNorman 03:45, 26 August 2006 (UTC)

One might also ask "cui bono?" Who might actually be harmed by such advertising, and who might benefit from such a suit? What if "Fred," say, ran a competing restaurant with a product that actually contained what's commonly called "lobster" rather than "langostinos"? I think "Fred" might have a legitimate beef. Or lobster. And perhaps the plaintiff could have been such a competitor, or a front for same. In any case, the current wording of the article has a passive-voice allegation with no Wikipedia-required verifiability. I don't suggest that the characterization of the lawsuit be deleted from the article; just tell the reader who made the characterizaton, and let the reader weigh the characterization in light of who made it. If it's a spokesperson for the Chamber of Commerce of the U.S., a reader might come to one conclusion; if it's a highly-respected law professor specializing in advertising and known for objectivity, a reader might come to another. Bruce Tindall 23:42, 26 August 2006 (UTC)