• Please be aware we've switched the forums to their own URL. (again) You'll find the new website address to be www.steelernationforum.com Thanks
  • Please clear your private messages. Your inbox is close to being full.

JPP sues ESPN

  • Thread starter Thread starter POP
  • Start date Start date
P

POP

Guest
http://bleacherreport.com/articles/...letter&utm_medium=newsletter&utm_campaign=nfl

As soon as the story broke showing JPP's medical records, it SCREAMED lawsuit to me.

Do you really think they were going bolts loose on making medical records private and than not care if you show a file on Twitter for millions to see? Shafter is a real dumb *** for doing that.

That's just not cool. I hope he get $20 million from ESPN. Shafter thought he really "aced it" when he bribed some dumb *** for those files.
 
I doubt he'll get anything, reporters aren't bound by privacy rules. And what are the damages? Lost wages? Pain and Suffering? No.

I don't see anything coming out of this for JPP.

Now if he sues the facility that allowed his records to be leaked....
 
I doubt he'll get anything, reporters aren't bound by privacy rules. And what are the damages? Lost wages? Pain and Suffering? No.

I don't see anything coming out of this for JPP.

Now if he sues the facility that allowed his records to be leaked....



BINGO, but I'd still like to see that pug ****** shefter squeezed like a zit. He use to be a decent in the know, till he started making things up. I think he started the Ben trade rumor.





Salute the nation
 
I doubt he'll get anything, reporters aren't bound by privacy rules. And what are the damages? Lost wages? Pain and Suffering? No.

I don't see anything coming out of this for JPP.

Now if he sues the facility that allowed his records to be leaked....

If you obtain someone's medical records without their consent you have a case against them and the provider.
 
If you obtain someone's medical records without their consent you have a case against them and the provider.

What are you basing that on?

He had no obligation to keep that info private, furthermore, he didn't release any info that wouldn't have been immediately self evident the first time anyone looked at JPP's hand. Its not like he exposed something that would've otherwise remained secret, like if someone was HIV+. Even then there would be no case because a reporter has no obligation to protect someone's privacy, in fact its just the opposite. JPP has no case against ESPN. And again, even if he had a case, what are the damages?
 
What are you basing that on?

He had no obligation to keep that info private, furthermore, he didn't release any info that wouldn't have been immediately self evident the first time anyone looked at JPP's hand. Its not like he exposed something that would've otherwise remained secret, like if someone was HIV+. Even then there would be no case because a reporter has no obligation to protect someone's privacy, in fact its just the opposite. JPP has no case against ESPN. And again, even if he had a case, what are the damages?

Doctor/patient is the same as attorney/client. ESPN will settle or fry.

A good lawyer gets this in front of a jury and starts scaring them with ideas of having their own records public, and major punitive damages could be in the offing.
 
what are you basing that on?

he had no obligation to keep that info private, furthermore, he didn't release any info that wouldn't have been immediately self evident the first time anyone looked at jpp's hand. Its not like he exposed something that would've otherwise remained secret, like if someone was hiv+. Even then there would be no case because a reporter has no obligation to protect someone's privacy, in fact its just the opposite. Jpp has no case against espn. And again, even if he had a case, what are the damages?
HIPPA

A real vigorous medical record privacy law....
 
I. GENERAL QUESTIONS
When do I have to be in compliance?
For the changes related to HITECH, September 23, 2013 (covered entities, business associates, and subcontractors.)

What legal documents should be developed under HIPAA?
Covered entities should develop the following legal documents through their legal counsel, and review additional requirements that may impact them, their business associates and subcontractors:

Authorization Forms – to obtain written permissions from patients to authorize covered entities to use or disclose health information;
Notice of Privacy Practices – to provide patients notice regarding disclosure and use of information; and
Covered entities must have business associate agreements to assure that business associates also comply with the rule. Additionally, “subcontractors” of business associates may also be required to comply and this must be reviewed in all contracts. The rule grants an additional one-year time-frame for contract compliance.
To view a sample agreement, go to this link: http://www.hhs.gov/ocr/privacy/hipaa/understanding/coveredentities/contractprov.html

What type information is protected?
The Privacy Rule protects all “individually identifiable health information” held or transmitted by a covered entity or its business associate, in any form or media, whether electronic, paper or oral.


Examples (not an exhaustive list):

Name
Specific dates – birth, admission, discharge, death
Telephone number
Social Security number, medical record number
Photographs
City, zip code, and other geographic identifiers…
What are “covered entities?”
Health plans — HMOs, insurers;
Health care clearinghouses – billing services, community health management information systems and “value added” networks and switches; and
Health care providers – medical or health service provider and any other person or organization that furnishes, bills, or is paid for health care in electronic form (e.g., insurers, physicians, hospitals, labs and pharmacies).
What is meant by “business associates” covered by the Rule?
Business associates perform functions or services for the covered entity that involve the use of protected health information. They may include: direct marketers, pharmaceutical manufacturers, medical equipment suppliers, software and database vendors and suppliers. A covered entity can also be a business associate to other covered entities. Business associates can be held liable at the federal and state level.
Under the omnibus rule business associate include:

A Health Information Organization, E-prescribing Gateway, or other person that provides data transmission services to a covered entity and requires access on a routine basis.
A person that offers a personal health record to one or more individuals on behalf of a covered entity.
A subcontractor that creates, receives, maintains or transmits protected health information on behalf of the business associate.
 
That was his douchbag copycat over at the NFL Net, Rapoport.

Thank you, now I remeber. Still doesn't keep shefter from being a douche..........




Salute the nation
 
Doctor/patient is the same as attorney/client.

What does that have to do with ESPN? They are neither the doctor, nor the patient, so they are in no way bound by any privacy rules pertaining to that relationship.
 
Business associates perform functions or services for the covered entity that involve the use of protected health information. They may include: direct marketers, pharmaceutical manufacturers, medical equipment suppliers, software and database vendors and suppliers. A covered entity can also be a business associate to other covered entities. Business associates can be held liable at the federal and state level.
Under the omnibus rule business associate include:

A Health Information Organization, E-prescribing Gateway, or other person that provides data transmission services to a covered entity and requires access on a routine basis.
A person that offers a personal health record to one or more individuals on behalf of a covered entity.
A subcontractor that creates, receives, maintains or transmits protected health information on behalf of the business associate.

ESPN does not fall into any of those categories. No where does it list 'news organization', 'reporter', or any other non-medical associated entity. ESPN is not trusted with health records, does not keep health records, and does not provide healthcare or medical equipment. HIPPA does not apply.
 
ESPN does not fall into any of those categories. No where does it list 'news organization', 'reporter', or any other non-medical associated entity. ESPN is not trusted with health records, does not keep health records, and does not provide healthcare or medical equipment. HIPPA does not apply.

Perhaps ...even if true, it doesn't necessarily mean ESPN will get off without having to pay some sort of penalty.... maybe a invasion of privacy settlement?
 
Last edited:
HIPPA

A real vigorous medical record privacy law....

Beat me to it. HIPPA raises privacy law to a whole new level. When I worked at Allegheny General I saw people lose their jobs for less than what Schefter did.
 
Beat me to it. HIPPA raises privacy law to a whole new level. When I worked at Allegheny General I saw people lose their jobs for less than what Schefter did.

Yes, you saw healthcare workers lose their jobs. I'm betting you never saw a reporter fired for HIPPA violations?
 
Perhaps ...even if true, it doesn't necessarily mean ESPN will get off without having to pay some sort of penalty.... maybe a invasion of privacy settlement?

I agree. I believe this is the aim, file and hope for a settlement of some type from ESPN. But I doubt they settle, it would set a bad precedent. It would probably cost them less to get the suit tossed.
 
What are you basing that on?

He had no obligation to keep that info private, furthermore, he didn't release any info that wouldn't have been immediately self evident the first time anyone looked at JPP's hand. Its not like he exposed something that would've otherwise remained secret, like if someone was HIV+. Even then there would be no case because a reporter has no obligation to protect someone's privacy, in fact its just the opposite. JPP has no case against ESPN. And again, even if he had a case, what are the damages?

You guys might be right on who to sue being the difference, but what you are NOT right on is the damages. Privacy is privacy; you don't have to show damages when someone fails to provide privacy. If a practitioner so much fails to provide privacy of medical conditions from a fax machine, they are liable. Who is to say which condition is "damaging" vs. others? Privacy is privacy. It is the law. So, we can all agree allowing an HIV condition out of the bag to be damaging. But what about herpes or crabs? Who's to say? Showing JPP's medical records was dirty, Someone should pay.
 
Yes, you saw healthcare workers lose their jobs. I'm betting you never saw a reporter fired for HIPPA violations?

Not yet, but then someone had to violate HIPPA to give Schefter that information.
 
So, we can all agree allowing an HIV condition out of the bag to be damaging. But what about herpes or crabs? Who's to say? Showing JPP's medical records was dirty, Someone should pay.
The difference between those conditions and JPP's situation is that HIV and herpes can be kept private. How would he have kept the fact that he is missing digits private? It can be argued that it was eventual public knowledge, if it even gets that far.

As far as the privacy issue: I thought we covered who is expected to keep medical info private, and the list doesn't include reporters, whose job it is to actually disseminate information.
 
Thank you, now I remeber. Still doesn't keep shefter from being a douche..........




Salute the nation

Oh yeah, I know, they're both douches. It's just that Rapoport is a copycat douche. That's the state of sports reporting these days. Everybody wants to be the first douche to tweet something out, no matter how they get the info or if it's even true or not.
 
Schmuckboy is a schmuck. Hope he gets fired. I hate all the 3 phone carrying jerkfaces.
 
The guy ****** up one of his hands, messing around with explosive materials, while most likely being intoxicated.

He doesn't deserve much sympathy here.
 
The guy ****** up one of his hands, messing around with explosive materials, while most likely being intoxicated.

He doesn't deserve much sympathy here.

He was also probably was selling drugs of some sort also. Selling kids into sex slavery. I agree....no sympathy here for losing part of his hand in an accident.
 
No sympathy...just would be cool to bring some pain to ESDISNEY
 
Top