Interesting article/Miami Herald

[Waquoit]

On 5/18/2020 at 12:29 AM, BirdTravels said:

Crew members sign contracts. Many companies have NDAs, contracts or codes of conduct which limit what an employee of that company can say about their employer. My company does. And I have to reaffirm my understanding and agreement to those terms annually.

At least you make minimum wage.

[SeaShark]

15 minutes ago, Waquoit said:

At least you make minimum wage.

 

Ignoring the fact that they are contracted workers whose wages are determined by the agreed-upon contract, considering that they are not working in the US where US wage rates apply, what does minimum wage have to do with anything? The real comparison comes in what they make on the ship vs the pay rates in their home countries where they would have to work otherwise.

Edited May 22, 2020 by SeaShark

[chengkp75]

18 minutes ago, Waquoit said:

At least you make minimum wage.

 

3 minutes ago, SeaShark said:

 

Ignoring the fact that they are contracted workers whose wages are determined by the agreed-upon contract, considering that they are not working in the US where US wage rates apply, what does minimum wage have to do with anything? The real comparison comes in what they make on the ship vs the pay rates in their home countries where they would have to work otherwise.

And, they are making the minimum wage for seafarers.  There is a statutory minimum wage for all seafarers.

[PortFees45]

3 hours ago, chengkp75 said:

Are you an expert in Bahamian and Panamanian law?  Or maritime law?  Have you seen a crew "article of agreement" or "contract" to know what terms are in them?  If not, how can you say that the threat is "blatantly false"?  Most companies, even in the US, have statements in either employment agreements or in company HR policy manuals relating to use of social media in regards to company policies, practices, etc, and the punishments for violating these.  This is without regard to the fact that the crew's employment contract is based not on US law, but on the laws of the flag state, which can have far different protections for what US citizens consider their civil rights.

There is no provision of Bahamian, Panamanian, or maritime law that would allow for the criminal prosecution of a crew member disseminating to the public what's happening on board these ships. But the NCL execs knew that the crew largely doesn't know that, and the threat would be sufficient to frighten them into silence. 

[chengkp75]

5 minutes ago, PortFees45 said:

There is no provision of Bahamian, Panamanian, or maritime law that would allow for the criminal prosecution of a crew member disseminating to the public what's happening on board these ships. But the NCL execs knew that the crew largely doesn't know that, and the threat would be sufficient to frighten them into silence. 

Really?  Is there any reference where I can see an employee's right under these laws to breach a confidentiality clause with the employer?  Cause it can be a criminal offense in the US.

[PortFees45]

Just now, chengkp75 said:

Really?  Is there any reference where I can see an employee's right under these laws to breach a confidentiality clause with the employer?  Cause it can be a criminal offense in the US.

There is no US statute at the state or federal level that allows for criminal prosecution due to violating a private contract. There are civil remedies the employer could seek, but not criminal. 

 

But without actually knowing about the law, I admit it SOUNDS plausible, which is why the unethical scum running NCL decided to use it as a scare tactic. 

[npcl]

4 hours ago, Formula280SS said:

 

Ok, we get it; you hate NCL, specifically, and the cruise lines in general.  Must be very "short" on the stocks.

 

Will stick with my own position.

 

CLIA reports for 2019, the Florida cruise industry impacts for 2019 accounted for 154,646 Total Employment Impact, $7,689,000,000 in Total Wage Impact and $8,485,000,000 in other Direct Expenditures.

 

https://cruising.org/-/media/research-updates/research/contribution-of-the-international-cruise-industry-to-the-us-economy-2018.pdf

 

Page 45

 

So, regarding the post, I still maintain that cruise ports in Florida will lead the way and that such ports are very important economic revenue sources for such ports' cities and the state of Florida.

Nope do not hate NCLH or cruise lines in general.  I do dislike it when people make over the top, incorrect claims such as you did with the claim that Miami port would be dead without cruising

 

Formula280SS

Port of Miami is dead without Cruises.  Period.

 

Luckily, Florida is leading the US in phased, measured re-opening.

 

The cruise line business will be thoroughly phased and measured also, IMO.

 

It's too important.

 

As of 2018, PortMiami accounts for approximately 334,500 jobs and has an annual economic impact of $43 billion to the state of Florida.

 

or your comment about why cruise line execs would not sign the CDC required documents

 

Formula280SS

Sorry, but the US was requiring the cruise line management and governance to be criminally and civilly and personal liable for any crew member related spread of C19 upon transfer from US ports.  That's why they (all of the lines) left a couple weeks ago to task up at their private islands and plan for alternate way to get crew home.

 

And then thank me for agreeing with them when the information I posted was counter to your claim

 

Then you tried making the cruising impact on the state sound even better by stating that the numbers did not include pre and post visits and other related economic information, even though the document you referenced clearly stated that those impacts were included in their calculations.

 

Yep that is somewhat annoying.

 

Since you keep making states about me hating cruise lines (spent over 100 days on them last year) or being short cruise line stocks, I will ask the question are you getting paid to lobby for them?

Edited May 22, 2020 by npcl

[npcl]

3 hours ago, chengkp75 said:

Yes, Bahamas does not allow anyone into the country, at all.  Manila is not allowing foreign crew changes, and is requiring a 14 day quarantine for their returning citizens before entering the country, hence the 25 ships parked in Manila Bay with crew.

 

Yes, the US is more lenient with some ship's crews.  Any crew member, from any type of ship, from any country, except for cruise ship crew, are free to crew change at any US port, and free to travel home or to the ship using public transportation, without meeting any of the CDC's requirements for cruise ship crew only.  These cruise ship crew have been in quarantine longer than any US federal or state guideline requires, there has been no interchange of personnel showing symptoms in weeks, there has been no interaction with the population outside the ship for weeks, and there are no cases on the ships.  While I feel that the CDC's requirements were justified at the beginning, when passengers were being disembarked, and there were cases of covid on the ships, and the requirements were designed to essentially stop the exchange of passengers on and off the ships, holding the crew to these requirements after weeks of quarantine is merely punitive against the cruise lines, when other ships' crews who have not been in as rigorous quarantine as the cruise ships, and even international air travelers are not being held to these requirements.

Chengkp75,

 

We have had this discussion before about cruise line cooperation (ended when Aquahound hinted that there was more going on but would not say)

 

I would propose that the reason that the CDC is treating cruise lines differently is because of the behavior of the cruise lines. That the CDC has reason to doubt that the cruise lines will act properly without the restrictions, and that they do not have reason to have those concerns about ships not affiliated with the cruises lines.

 

If I am correct then you will not see the cruise lines sue because such a case would give the CDC reason to bring forth in a public setting any documentation they might have about the behavior of the cruise lines and the cruise lines would not want that to happen.

 

I think the reason comes out very clearly  in what the CDC has posted on their web site

 

At this time, given the limited availability of testing onboard ships and inconsistent reporting from cruise ships, CDC does not have confirmation or evidence that any cruise ship is free of COVID-19.

 

There have been several documented cases where cruise lines have hidden behind "flu like" symptoms. Where there has clearly been COVID on board ships, yet the cruise lines have not tested, following the approach thats its not COVID until it is confirmed to be COVID so numerous cases on board ships (as been documented in several new reports) that have not been reported.  This has included cases off of the OASIS where crew members had to be medically evacuated to Miami.

 

Through out all of this the cruise lines have taken the approach that as long as they can get the problem off of their ships, it is no longer their problem and no longer their expense.  This is exactly what the CDC rules are designed to stop.  That the cruise lines must continue to own the problem and associated expense once it leaves the ship.

 

Cases where clearly COVID-19 was suspected, or should have been suspected such as the Eclipse in San Diego, where passengers where clearly showing COVID-19 like symptoms, including one lady taken immediately to the hospital where she was immediately diagnosed.  Either intent or incompetence.  No test - no COVID.

 

Even today you are hearing about examples of where the cruise lines are trying to run over the governments of Caribbean Islands.  For example from the Prime minister of Grenada saying the the cruise lines agreed to help pay for quarantine costs of returning crew members and are now refusing to do it.  Or Haiti where the cruise lines off loaded in Labadee and bypassed the Haiti governments quarantine requirements, or most recently in Jamaica where the government was in negotiations about returning crew members (no date set) when a ship entered Jamaican waters, without permission leaving the government pretty much no choice on taking the crew back.

 

Not exactly the behavior of a good citizen corporation, trying to be cooperative with the various governments and agencies.

[npcl]

1 hour ago, PortFees45 said:

There is no US statute at the state or federal level that allows for criminal prosecution due to violating a private contract. There are civil remedies the employer could seek, but not criminal. 

 

But without actually knowing about the law, I admit it SOUNDS plausible, which is why the unethical scum running NCL decided to use it as a scare tactic. 

Unless you are working for the government where violating confidentiality can result in criminal penalty, or disclose specific information, such as medical (HIPAA for example) that are covered by specific privacy laws.

[Capitan Obvious]

35 minutes ago, npcl said:

 I will ask the question are you getting paid to lobby for them?

 

That is an odd question/accusation. Perhaps some projection? Are you being paid to lobby against them?

[chengkp75]

4 minutes ago, npcl said:

I would propose that the reason that the CDC is treating cruise lines differently is because of the behavior of the cruise lines

I agree that this is punitive to the cruise lines, but as I've noted, both the CDC and USCG allow other merchant mariners to crew change without the CDC restrictions, so there would be a case, given that there have been no passenger contact in months, there have been no outside crew changes in months, and there are no new cases onboard the ships, that the cruise ship crews present no more danger than the other crew who are allowed to change without jumping through hoops.  Why hold the crew to punish the cruise line?  As I've said in other threads, while I feel that the CDC requirements were justified at the time they were put in place, the time has long since passed where they are doing anything beneficial to the public health, and are punitive and discriminatory against the crew, not only the cruise lines.  Fine, keep in place the requirements for hospital ships and such, and medical care on ships, and on restricting embarking of passengers, but given the crew have been in quarantine for about the historical 40 days, it is time to let them travel like other merchant mariners, and not as second class humans or unwanted trash.

 

1 hour ago, PortFees45 said:

There is no US statute at the state or federal level that allows for criminal prosecution due to violating a private contract. There are civil remedies the employer could seek, but not criminal. 

 

But without actually knowing about the law, I admit it SOUNDS plausible, which is why the unethical scum running NCL decided to use it as a scare tactic. 

Actually, if the breach of confidentiality includes things like theft of intellectual rights or proprietary information, then it can be a criminal case.  But, you've got your mind made up that the cruise lines, to which you gladly gave your money in the past, are cruel, inhuman, greedy, unscrupulous and criminal.

[npcl]

7 minutes ago, Capitan Obvious said:

 

That is an odd question/accusation. Perhaps some projection? Are you being paid to lobby against them?

No I am not.  Only raised that question because he had a tendency to ask me question like am I short NCLH, or did I hate NCLH or cruise lines in general.  In return I though I would ask him a similar question.

 

Especially since my posts of this stream, up until my response to Chengkp75 I had not posted comments negative to the cruise lines only that the economic impact of cruise lines on the stated of Florida is much lower then the impact of cargo ports.

[PortFees45]

8 minutes ago, chengkp75 said:

Actually, if the breach of confidentiality includes things like theft of intellectual rights or proprietary information, then it can be a criminal case.  

No, it can't. 

 

The only possible exception would be if someone who holds a government-issued security clearance improperly disseminates classified material, or if someone illegally obtained proprietary information prior to disclosing it (like hacking into a computer system). Clearly neither of those circumstances apply here. There are no criminal penalties for violating an employment agreement with a private company.

 

I wouldn't argue with you about how to fix an azipod. You might not want to argue with me about this. 

[npcl]

25 minutes ago, chengkp75 said:

I agree that this is punitive to the cruise lines, but as I've noted, both the CDC and USCG allow other merchant mariners to crew change without the CDC restrictions, so there would be a case, given that there have been no passenger contact in months, there have been no outside crew changes in months, and there are no new cases onboard the ships, that the cruise ship crews present no more danger than the other crew who are allowed to change without jumping through hoops.  Why hold the crew to punish the cruise line?  As I've said in other threads, while I feel that the CDC requirements were justified at the time they were put in place, the time has long since passed where they are doing anything beneficial to the public health, and are punitive and discriminatory against the crew, not only the cruise lines.  Fine, keep in place the requirements for hospital ships and such, and medical care on ships, and on restricting embarking of passengers, but given the crew have been in quarantine for about the historical 40 days, it is time to let them travel like other merchant mariners, and not as second class humans or unwanted trash.

 

 

But as the CDC states on their web site which I listed earlier:  Which just happens to be under the comment of 

Why are crew members required to use non-commercial travel if they are from NON-COVID ships.

 

At this time, given the limited availability of testing onboard ships and inconsistent reporting from cruise ships, CDC does not have confirmation or evidence that any cruise ship is free of COVID-19. 

 

So just maybe if the cruise lines were to be consistent in reporting and did do testing, and were providing their results to the CDC then just maybe they could be treated like crew from other ships.

 

We, as in the general public, without having access to the information that the USCG and CDC has, pretty much know from media and crew reports, that there have been COVID outbreaks on cruise ships among the crew. We also know that COVID-19 infected crew members have been brought to shore and only diagnosed as COVID-19 once they have been on shore.

 

Clearly the cruise lines have been moving crew between ships. So unless the cruise lines have been far more active in testing and reporting than it seems than the CDC comment would still seem to be valid.  After all it seems that on some ships the crew are still being somewhat isolated, which would not be necessary if there was no concern about potential COVID on board ships even at this date.

 

Even with the restrictions.  Keep in mind that if a travel company is trying to reduce costs when they are taking a large number of people to an event they often charter a plane because they can do so at a lower cost than to buy  commercial tickets.  Before I retired the company I worked for would often charter a plane to take people back and forth to some facilities when enough people were traveling, such that the charter was cheaper than commercial tickets.

 

So for large numbers the costs should not be excessive, as long as the receiving countries are prepared to receive the flight.

 

Certainly a fair number of crew have been sent home using charters.

 

The cruise lines seems to be having issues coordinating even with the countries in the Caribbean as far as returning crew members. 

 

Edited May 22, 2020 by npcl

[npcl]

9 minutes ago, PortFees45 said:

No, it can't. 

 

The only possible exception would be if someone who holds a government-issued security clearance improperly disseminates classified material, or if someone illegally obtained proprietary information prior to disclosing it (like hacking into a computer system). Clearly neither of those circumstances apply here. There are no criminal penalties for violating an employment agreement with a private company.

 

I wouldn't argue with you about how to fix an azipod. You might not want to argue with me about this. 

Actually since one only needs to show one case to prove that someone can be charged for such theft you might not want ot be so certain on this.  While certainly non-disclosure agreements are seldom prosecuted under criminal statues the following certainly does show that it is possible.

 

Federal prosecutors charged Anthony Levandowski, the pioneering self-driving car engineer, with 33 counts of theft and attempted theft of trade secrets from Google on Tuesday.

The criminal indictment is the latest twist in a years-long dispute over intellectual property between Google, where Levandowski worked on autonomous vehicles for nearly a decade, and Uber, which purchased a self-driving startup from Levandowski for a reported $680m in August 2016.

 

According to the criminal complaint, Levandowski downloaded approximately 14,000 files from Google and transferred them to his personal laptop in the months preceding his departure from Google – after he had begun discussions with executives at Uber

[PortFees45]

5 minutes ago, npcl said:

Actually since one only needs to show one case to prove that someone can be charged for such theft you might not want ot be so certain on this.  While certainly non-disclosure agreements are seldom prosecuted under criminal statues the following certainly does show that it is possible.

 

Federal prosecutors charged Anthony Levandowski, the pioneering self-driving car engineer, with 33 counts of theft and attempted theft of trade secrets from Google on Tuesday.

The criminal indictment is the latest twist in a years-long dispute over intellectual property between Google, where Levandowski worked on autonomous vehicles for nearly a decade, and Uber, which purchased a self-driving startup from Levandowski for a reported $680m in August 2016.

 

According to the criminal complaint, Levandowski downloaded approximately 14,000 files from Google and transferred them to his personal laptop in the months preceding his departure from Google – after he had begun discussions with executives at Uber

Yes, theft, as in illegally obtaining the proprietary materials in question. 

 

No crew member is committing theft by posting on social media about what's happening on the ship. 

[Formula280SS]

5 hours ago, chengkp75 said:

Considering Miami is the 12th largest container port in the US, I don't think it is "dead" without cruises.

 

Guess I probably should have stated the "cruise port" to pacify all of the commercial port folks who appear to not want cruise ships to return.  It's odd, as they can mutually exist; I don't know why the knock on cruising.

[npcl]

13 minutes ago, PortFees45 said:

Yes, theft, as in illegally obtaining the proprietary materials in question. 

 

No crew member is committing theft by posting on social media about what's happening on the ship. 

No, but Chengkp75 had explicitly listed the examples that could be criminally prosecuted including intellectual property theft and your response was

 

no it can't

...

I wouldn't argue with you about how to fix an azipod. You might not want to argue with me about this. 

 

Then you proceeded to change the definition from what he posted.

 

Clearly the google case did not involve someone hacking into a computer, but instead was theft of intellectual property that they had access to as part of their job.

 

Edited May 22, 2020 by npcl

[npcl]

1 minute ago, Formula280SS said:

 

Guess I probably should have stated the "cruise port" to pacify all of the commercial port folks who appear to not want cruise ships to return.  It's odd, as they can mutually exist; I don't know why the knock on cruising.

No knock on cruising.  Only knock on playing loose with details

[chengkp75]

14 minutes ago, npcl said:

So just maybe if the cruise lines were to be consistent in reporting and did do testing, and were providing their results to the CDC then just maybe they could be treated like crew from other ships.

But, again, my point is that no other crew, on any ships, from any country, traveling from any country are required to make more than a simple attestation of health on the ship at the time of clearing into the US, and no one is required to be tested before they leave the ship.  So, without any testing what so ever, and with only a simple statement by the Captain that no one on the ship has covid like symptoms, why are these crew allowed to  crew change?  How is their reporting or testing any better than the cruise ships.  Or do we believe that the cruise ships are currently "death ships" with crew getting sick and dying and the officers hiding them in the walk in refrigerators?

 

16 minutes ago, npcl said:

We also know that COVID-19 infected crew members have been brought to shore and only diagnosed as COVID-19 once they have been on shore.

Those crew were landed because they were ill, but there are no reports that I've seen of current cases on the ships looking to disembark crew.

 

17 minutes ago, npcl said:

Clearly the cruise lines have been moving crew between ships. So unless the cruise lines have been far more active in testing and reporting than it seems than the CDC comment would still seem to be valid.  After all it seems that on some ships the crew are still being somewhat isolated, which would not be necessary if there was no concern about potential COVID on board ships even at this date.

So, moving crew from one isolation ward (ship) to another isolation ward (ship), neither ship having any current cases is cause for concern?  Okay, then continue another 14 day isolation for those moved.  This is what we have done with crew who joined after the lockdown.  The crew that was onboard before that continued business as usual, since we had all been isolated together and no one was sick.  When new crew join, they have to eat separately, and wear masks, and keep distance for 14 days, and can then rejoin "general population".  The crew on the cruise ships are "somewhat isolated" mainly for the optics of the situation, and given that there are no passengers, it makes little sense to move everyone back to their crew cabins.  Really, after weeks or months of quarantine, where is the "potential" covid going to come from?  Why can US citizens move about the country taking commercial airlines without any time in quarantine if they are essential workers.  Why can international travelers make connections in US airports without any quarantine?  If you want to punish the cruise lines for possible or perceived poor performance during the early stages of the pandemic, fine, keep them from embarking passengers, but don't punish the crew.

[Formula280SS]

Just now, npcl said:

No knock on cruising.  Only knock on playing loose with details

 

You've knocked cruises and cruises using ports relentlessly.

 

None "looser" than your posts, and others have noted potential reasons.

 

Will stick with my own position.

 

CLIA reports for 2019, the Florida cruise industry impacts for 2019 accounted for 154,646 Total Employment Impact, $7,689,000,000 in Total Wage Impact and $8,485,000,000 in other Direct Expenditures.

 

https://cruising.org/-/media/research-updates/research/contribution-of-the-international-cruise-industry-to-the-us-economy-2018.pdf

 

Page 45

 

So, regarding the post, I still maintain that cruise ports in Florida will lead the way and that such ports are very important economic revenue sources for such ports' cities and the state of Florida.

[npcl]

11 minutes ago, chengkp75 said:

But, again, my point is that no other crew, on any ships, from any country, traveling from any country are required to make more than a simple attestation of health on the ship at the time of clearing into the US, and no one is required to be tested before they leave the ship.  So, without any testing what so ever, and with only a simple statement by the Captain that no one on the ship has covid like symptoms, why are these crew allowed to  crew change?  How is their reporting or testing any better than the cruise ships.  Or do we believe that the cruise ships are currently "death ships" with crew getting sick and dying and the officers hiding them in the walk in refrigerators?

 

Those crew were landed because they were ill, but there are no reports that I've seen of current cases on the ships looking to disembark crew.

 

So, moving crew from one isolation ward (ship) to another isolation ward (ship), neither ship having any current cases is cause for concern?  Okay, then continue another 14 day isolation for those moved.  This is what we have done with crew who joined after the lockdown.  The crew that was onboard before that continued business as usual, since we had all been isolated together and no one was sick.  When new crew join, they have to eat separately, and wear masks, and keep distance for 14 days, and can then rejoin "general population".  The crew on the cruise ships are "somewhat isolated" mainly for the optics of the situation, and given that there are no passengers, it makes little sense to move everyone back to their crew cabins.  Really, after weeks or months of quarantine, where is the "potential" covid going to come from?  Why can US citizens move about the country taking commercial airlines without any time in quarantine if they are essential workers.  Why can international travelers make connections in US airports without any quarantine?  If you want to punish the cruise lines for possible or perceived poor performance during the early stages of the pandemic, fine, keep them from embarking passengers, but don't punish the crew.

As the CDC stated they do not know for the reasons stated.  I would guess that they do not trust the word of the cruise lines, though will take the word of other Captains.  Maybe they have had cases of the cruise lines being less than truthful.

 

No recent cases, but certainly it was one of the drivers in the CDC rules being put into place.

 

 

Edited May 22, 2020 by npcl

[npcl]

3 minutes ago, Formula280SS said:

 

You've knocked cruises and cruises using ports relentlessly.

 

None "looser" than your posts, and others have noted potential reasons.

 

Will stick with my own position.

 

CLIA reports for 2019, the Florida cruise industry impacts for 2019 accounted for 154,646 Total Employment Impact, $7,689,000,000 in Total Wage Impact and $8,485,000,000 in other Direct Expenditures.

 

https://cruising.org/-/media/research-updates/research/contribution-of-the-international-cruise-industry-to-the-us-economy-2018.pdf

 

Page 45

 

So, regarding the post, I still maintain that cruise ports in Florida will lead the way and that such ports are very important economic revenue sources for such ports' cities and the state of Florida.

I posted information to support mine.  You just seem to be dropping things when faced with details counter to your claims.  

 

Formula280SS

Port of Miami is dead without Cruises.  Period.

 

Luckily, Florida is leading the US in phased, measured re-opening.

 

The cruise line business will be thoroughly phased and measured also, IMO.

 

It's too important.

 

As of 2018, PortMiami accounts for approximately 334,500 jobs and has an annual economic impact of $43 billion to the state of Florida.

 

or your comment about why cruise line execs would not sign the CDC required documents

 

Formula280SS

Sorry, but the US was requiring the cruise line management and governance to be criminally and civilly and personal liable for any crew member related spread of C19 upon transfer from US ports.  That's why they (all of the lines) left a couple weeks ago to task up at their private islands and plan for alternate way to get crew home.

 

And then thank me for agreeing with them when the information I posted was counter to your claim

 

Then you tried making the cruising impact on the state sound even better by stating that the numbers did not include pre and post visits and other related economic information, even though the document you referenced clearly stated that those impacts were included in their calculations.

 

 

Please post the documentation that is counter to anything that I posted. I have posted documentation counter to these claims.

 

 

 

Edited May 22, 2020 by npcl

[Formula280SS]

Sorry, not getting into the sand box.

 

Will stick with my own position.

 

CLIA reports for 2019, the Florida cruise industry impacts for 2019 accounted for 154,646 Total Employment Impact, $7,689,000,000 in Total Wage Impact and $8,485,000,000 in other Direct Expenditures.

 

https://cruising.org/-/media/research-updates/research/contribution-of-the-international-cruise-industry-to-the-us-economy-2018.pdf

 

Page 45

 

So, regarding the post, I still maintain that cruise ports in Florida will lead the way and that such ports are very important economic revenue sources for such ports' cities and the state of Florida.

[PortFees45]

2 hours ago, npcl said:

No, but Chengkp75 had explicitly listed the examples that could be criminally prosecuted including intellectual property theft and your response was

 

no it can't

...

I wouldn't argue with you about how to fix an azipod. You might not want to argue with me about this. 

 

Then you proceeded to change the definition from what he posted.

 

Clearly the google case did not involve someone hacking into a computer, but instead was theft of intellectual property that they had access to as part of their job.

 

The Google case is inapplicable to the situation with the crew on these ships. No crew member faces any criminal exposure, in any jurisdiction, for publicly disclosing what is happening on the ships, period. NCL can fire them. NCL could even take civil action against them, but they are at no risk of prosecution from any "shore side authorities." It was a thuggish lie meant to frighten an already frightened and desperate group of vulnerable people into compliance to avoid more bad PR. It's one of the most disgusting things NCL has done, and whomever made the decision to relay that lie should be fired. 

Edited May 22, 2020 by PortFees45