Me too...so having said that...

Maybe I missed something, but isn't the company who was in custody of the car responsible to make sure things like this don't happen? Or was that security agreement possibly forgotten about? I would think that things like that are put in place way ahead of time.

Let's say I was invited to take a tour of GM. Can I sneak into one of GM's design rooms (my ninja skills are strong) and take pictures and then post them and get away with it? What about me getting one of those Austin power spy cameras and taking some pictures of the 2012 Malibu renderings? Can I sell them to Ford? Why not?

I guess while there was obviously some hole that allowed this to happen, I can't say that just because it happened it is okay to do. If I find a credit card I can't start using the numbers to buy things and say it is okay, nor can I post those precious numbers on the Internet. Just because it can happen due to error or fault doesn't mean it is the right thing to do and is therefore excusable.

And if you think so, Dan...snap some pics of you wearing a Batman cape and nothing else so I can hire something with a strong constitution to post them all over the net.

 

You tell him, Jason! If he talks back, I'm gonna go find the ban button and nuke his *** off this site.

 

Yeah, yeah...the joke is old already, keep it in the Lounge.

 

You would think so...

Apparently somebody failed.

If the shipping company failed, it's GM's fault for not picking a good shipping company and/or securing the car properly.

If the shipping company didn't fail, it's GM's fault for not securing the car properly.

Either way, it's GM's fault.


Did you have an agreement about not taking pictures or taking a camera in? I.e. did you voluntarily suspend your rights to do so?

If not, snap away - the repurcussions of which can be determined later, but there are no legal ones.



1) A credit card can cause actual damages, BUT if there are no actual damages from you doing the above (i.e. nobody takes the numbers and goes on a Dunkin Donuts spree... or whatever...), there are no damages.

2) Again, it is not theft for somebody to take a picture of a car.

3) If GM is this worried about it, they need to step up and take responsibility for their own security, which they HAVE NOT.

4) Excuseable depends on who agreed to what. If the person who took the picture agreed to suspend his rights to do so voluntarily - and then did so anyway, he is in the wrong. If not, he's not.

5) Even if he IS in the wrong, good luck proving damages.

6) Nothing criminal could POSSIBLY come from taking a picture like those. If the picture-taker agreed to suspend his rights, and then took pictures anyway, then GM could try a civil case... but again, they have to prove damages.



Post them here, Robin... my cape and your green/orange utility belt and tights would result in a huge traffic surge!

 

I think I am following you. I am not sure how much I agree with all of it, but I see where you are coming from.

 

How do you know this?

How do you know that GM did NOT have a security agreement with the shipping Co. and it was broken by the employee?

My guess is that some cowboy took upon himself to take a joy ride and snap some pictures...probably for monitary gain.....

 

It was reported that he did not make any money off the pictures.

 

The pictures themselves are the proof. Need anything else be said?

 

Just to switch gears slightly....


Does anyone get the feeling that maybe the BD/Stingray/Z07/SS/whatever, is actually the next Z06?

Pure speculation on my part. But the LS3 will probably be breathing down the LS7's neck pretty heavily. And the LS7 itself will cease production shortly after the BD is released.

Just a thought...

 

So you're saying that GM needs to do EVERYTHING "in house"?

What about part mfr's? What happens if they "leak" pictures?

Where does it end?

 

Nope.

Best indication is that the Z06 will hang around and what you are looking at is the Corvette SS.

Hmmmm.... Imagine that...

 

An interesting thought....but I still have to think there will be something between the base Corvette and this supercharged model. The hardware they have on this test mule alone makes me think the rest of the car is going to nail those $100,000 estimates. Hell the brake package alone is valued at over $8,000! So unless Chevrolet has completely lost its mind and plans on pricing the "regular" Z06 out of the stratosphere, I can't see it. (Ahh, the beauty and simplicity of the C5 Z06....)

EDIT: I will cry if the car is actually called Corvette SS.

 

They'd be a lot better served by doing SOMETHING, ANYTHING about security if they are going to get all worked up by this.

If there are truly damages here (there aren't... matter of fact the publicity is a positive thing for GM...), then it would seem to me that those damages offset the cost of better and more complete security, don't they?



They have contract provisions that preclude it. Regardless, it's STILL GM's responsibility.



When GM "Mans Up" and actively takes responsibility for the security of their future products.

 

Get your Kleenex out. The fat lady appears to be warming her voice up.

And you know what they say...

"There's a little Corvette in every Chevrolet."

 

Anyone notice that Chevy has raised the base price of the 2007 Z06 5k to $70,000? Depending on who you talk to, I've heard anything from around $80K to $100K even, for the BD.

I don't think they should call it SS either.