Am I not understanding things, or are these guys suing people for giving a bad review of the game?
No, they are not sueing for bad reviews of the game, they are sueing for threats to their life and business. And malice directed towards them in a public forum.
Words like "I will beat you down", "I hope you die in a fiery car crash", and "you're a thief" only prove malice on the part of the 100 Steam users. The list of unprotected (Not Free) speech is long, and potentially damaging. The users may be held financially responsible for their share of the $18 million dollars.
YouTube is defending Jim Sterling, so he should be safe. No one is defending the 100 Steam users in the personal injury suit. They will be fighting for their own skin, and without proper representation they will probably lose. Why? The individual's free speech is not as protected as the corporation's free speech (Jim Sterling & YouTube). Jim chose words that don't reflect animosity, so he should be safe.
How will this change Steam? Steam may stop allowing unmoderated comments. I don't believe they will start moderating, I think they will simply do away with user reviews. Only reviewers that prove liability insurance will get a voice.
I doubt Valve will rollover and give out customer data unless they are legally compelled to. The fallout from that would be ginormous. If the internet nerd-raged over the Sony data breach and people wanted to sue Hello for being lying bastards, it would be nothing compared to gamers having their data given over a comments.
On top of that they're not filing a criminal complaint. They're filing a civil suit. It will be interesting to see how far this goes, or doesn't.
Read my post right above your post, Judge has granted it.....it's happening. How the lawsuit will go, idk.
What?? Hahaahha I'm on the list yay!! Butt hurt James can come at me
all he wants. What's he gonna do take away my $30K in student loan debt
or the apartment I rent? Hahha I ain't got shit bitch but the wet nuts
hanging between my knees for yall to suck.
Connor, This is DemonSwordGames. I am actually the person on the top of their 'to sue' list.
I quite literally did none of the things they are accusing me of.
In fact I am somewhat unique (I think) because I am a developer. For some reason, Digihom thinks I compete with them, but my only game isnt even truly on the market yet...
I actually have evidence of them harassing ME and behaving in a threatening manner towards ME lol I would like to share my testimony and evidence.
In response to those who replied - I
agree, but Ive done nothing wrong at all. I am prepared to discuss the
checkered history and why they may be targeting me though.
Can you imagine what will happen if... Digital Homicide actually wins against the steam users? How many personal injury cases will spring up overnight due to all the crap people post against others. The US court system would be overwhelmed just with the cases against the Goons, LOL.
"Sean (Murray) saying MP will be in the game is not remotely close to evidence that at the point of purchase people thought there was MP in the game." - SEANMCAD
I think Digital Homicide are nuts. That said, I won't shed any tears if they successfully sue people who give death threats etc on forums. The internet will be a better place if those people are purged.
Well, you can always count on at least one element of the gaming industry to put their best immature foot forward and provide us with some entertainment via legal bantering. Most of the newer games can't seem to accomplish anything that resembles entertainment, so...
I like how they are going to sue Valve but have not discussed anything with an actual lawyer. The last part of the news article says that they are requesting a lawyer contact them to help them with the suit.
In the prior subpoena on the Valve users and the suit against Jim Sterling they are representing themselves. Does this mean they could not find a lawyer to take the case? Probably.
Lots of grandstanding by these guys.
They should try another approach to make money.... make a good game that sells lots of copies and people enjoy. I know, it's a crazy thought!
I'm no lawyer but can't a counter suit be filed since this inconveniences the lives of quite a few people especially if it goes to trial?
I would think so. Either Valve, of any of the 100 Steam users, or Jim Sterling & YouTube may counter sue. But I don't believe the 100 Steam users can afford a countersuit.
@cheyane, and @Talonsin look up Internet Defamation possibly with a new search also. It has already started, laws are being changed or written for the first time to make what many feel as their freedom of speech on the internet, go away.
For example, but with no legal standing. Someone threatens another with death in a forum post. The suspect is identified. They could be turned over to the police, and/or a civil case can be brought up. A criminal case is very difficult to prove 100%, civil cases are xxxx...
Pardon any spelling errors
Konfess your cyns and some maybe forgiven Boy: Why can't I talk to Him? Mom: We don't talk to Priests. As if it could exist, without being payed for. F2P means you get what you paid for. Pay nothing, get nothing. Even telemarketers wouldn't think that. It costs money to play. Therefore P2W.
What is this even? You can't sue someone because you dislike their review of your game, and you especilly don't want to sue the people that actually went ahead and punished themselves by purchasing your bloody awful game! These guys are clearly smoking something pretty great... or bad. I don't know which.
From what I can gather, this probably is a frivolous lawsuit. But just to play devil's advocate for a moment, are you guys saying that developers and corporations always cheat and steal. And that what anonymous bloggers and reviewers say is always the truth? What if a claim goes beyond someone merely expressing an opinion, but to making outright false representations. You don't think that could actually financially hurt the company on the receiving end of them?
People are talking specifically about this developer and the reviews in question.
-- Whammy - a 64x64 miniRPG - RPG Quiz - can you get all 25 right? - FPS Quiz - how well do you know your shooters?
let me see if I understand this, they want to sue a dude who said they game was horrible? and not only that they also want to sue with 100 steam users who agree with him? damn make it 101 then I don't even have a name for that game,
but good luck for Sterling when he sue then back after this lol
Wrong, @Razeekster, and @alkarionlog, this is not about bad reviews. The 100 Steam users are being sued, because there may be evidence that they expressed Malice towards the developers and their families. Evidence of Malice is required to sue someone, not simply a bad review (which may not be Evidence of Malice). What may be Evidence of Malice? Possibly a threat of death.
I suspect that there are more than 100 users that wrote bad reviews. The others were careful in their word choice and may avoid the semblance of Malice. Those who were not careful, may end up being sued.
Pardon any spelling errors
Konfess your cyns and some maybe forgiven Boy: Why can't I talk to Him? Mom: We don't talk to Priests. As if it could exist, without being payed for. F2P means you get what you paid for. Pay nothing, get nothing. Even telemarketers wouldn't think that. It costs money to play. Therefore P2W.
Wrong, @Razeekster, and @alkarionlog, this is not about bad reviews. The 100 Steam users are being sued, because there may be evidence that they expressed Malice towards the developers and their families. Evidence of Malice is required to sue someone, not simply a bad review (which may not be Evidence of Malice). What may be Evidence of Malice? Possibly a threat of death.
I suspect that there are more than 100 users that wrote bad reviews. The others were careful in their word choice and may avoid the semblance of Malice. Those who were not careful, may end up being sued.
You do not have to have malice to be able to sue people in the US sorry. All you have to do is prove slander or any other number of things that could be listed on the law suit. Ever wonder how all these frivolous law suits never go to trial or why. These guys have not even gone through the right channels to get a proper law suit to begin with. You need a judge to order steam to give anything up which I would have a hard time seeing that happen. They can ask and do whatever they want but unless actually ordered by the court steam is not required to do anything. Hell I can go fill out proper paperwork right now showing that I was offended by a shirt someone wore and sue someone, I would get laughed out of a courtroom but you can just about sue for anything at all. Normally the person that loses a lawsuit like this ends up paying the cost of both legal fees so it isn't a smart move on these guys part to begin with.
Wrong, @Razeekster, and @alkarionlog, this is not about bad reviews. The 100 Steam users are being sued, because there may be evidence that they expressed Malice towards the developers and their families. Evidence of Malice is required to sue someone, not simply a bad review (which may not be Evidence of Malice). What may be Evidence of Malice? Possibly a threat of death.
I suspect that there are more than 100 users that wrote bad reviews. The others were careful in their word choice and may avoid the semblance of Malice. Those who were not careful, may end up being sued.
It's not illegal to wish someone was dead, to say you wish they were dead, or to tell them you wished they would die. It is illegal to threaten somebody and it doesn't have to be with death.
There is a huge legal wrangle going on and neither side has been been clearly damaged outside of their anecdotal claims. In California there is an ongoing legal battle between Yelp and businesses. Some customers have been sued successfully and some haven't. In one case a California business sued a Utah man, for the bad review, and then when he refused to pay they sent his account to collections. He sued the business on appeal and a federal judge awarded him $300k plus legal fees.
This case has a few complex variables so like I said earlier it will be interesting to see how this plays out. It's certainly not a given either way. One thing I think will eventually come out of this, for our better benefit, will be clearer regulations and laws about what we can freely say publicly about a business, what we can't, and what we're protected in saying even if a business doesn't like it. This will hopefully lay clear boundaries and keep either party responsible for how they act.
Correct @Torval, a wish is not illegal, but they didn't say "I wish." They said, "If I see you (at a named public event) I will kill you." I thought I used words that conveyed the difference between a wish and a threat. I apologize if I failed to make myself clear.
Really the only point I was trying to make was that this case is not about bad review. Still you gave an example of a suit regarding bad reviews. The only purpose that serves is confuse people who don't understand what is going on. Yes these 100 Steam users may have posted negative review, but that is not why they are being sued. And I want the forum readers here to understand that these 100 Steam users were not being sued for writing negative reviews, they wrote something more that got them into trouble.
You are again correct, this case is very complex IMO. But I still feel the first round will go in favor of Jim Sterling & YouTube, but against the 100 Steam users. IMO, they may even win their first appeals, but they will lose their final appeal.
Pardon any spelling errors
Konfess your cyns and some maybe forgiven Boy: Why can't I talk to Him? Mom: We don't talk to Priests. As if it could exist, without being payed for. F2P means you get what you paid for. Pay nothing, get nothing. Even telemarketers wouldn't think that. It costs money to play. Therefore P2W.
Wrong, @Razeekster, and @alkarionlog, this is not about bad reviews. The 100 Steam users are being sued, because there may be evidence that they expressed Malice towards the developers and their families. Evidence of Malice is required to sue someone, not simply a bad review (which may not be Evidence of Malice). What may be Evidence of Malice? Possibly a threat of death.
I suspect that there are more than 100 users that wrote bad reviews. The others were careful in their word choice and may avoid the semblance of Malice. Those who were not careful, may end up being sued.
You do not have to have malice to be able to sue people in the US sorry. All you have to do is prove slander or any other number of things that could be listed on the law suit. Ever wonder how all these frivolous law suits never go to trial or why. These guys have not even gone through the right channels to get a proper law suit to begin with. You need a judge to order steam to give anything up which I would have a hard time seeing that happen. They can ask and do whatever they want but unless actually ordered by the court steam is not required to do anything. Hell I can go fill out proper paperwork right now showing that I was offended by a shirt someone wore and sue someone, I would get laughed out of a courtroom but you can just about sue for anything at all. Normally the person that loses a lawsuit like this ends up paying the cost of both legal fees so it isn't a smart move on these guys part to begin with.
You are right @k61977, there is infact a long list of of other allegations not limited to Malice. Less than 30 are accused of making death threats. I chose to focus on Malice and death, to make it easier for our forum readers to comprehend that the issue here was not bad reviews. As so many wrongly thought.
True they haven't gone through the steps to begin a lawsuit against the 100 Steam users. But they did get a judge to order Steam to identify the 100 Steam users @Tiller posted a link, so everyone is seeing that happen. That lead to Steam removing all DH games from its site.
Let me make this perfectly clear, I don't agree, support, condone, or defend DH or its practices. I saw several of my fellow forum readers incorrectly interpreting the situation as being about negative review. I wanted them to understand that something more than negative a review was going on here. That's all I was trying to do.
BTW, it's funny you brought up the offending T-shirt. I was sued for that and lost back in the 90's. Are you doxxing me? O.o
Pardon any spelling errors
Konfess your cyns and some maybe forgiven Boy: Why can't I talk to Him? Mom: We don't talk to Priests. As if it could exist, without being payed for. F2P means you get what you paid for. Pay nothing, get nothing. Even telemarketers wouldn't think that. It costs money to play. Therefore P2W.
Wrong, @Razeekster, and @alkarionlog, this is not about bad reviews. The 100 Steam users are being sued, because there may be evidence that they expressed Malice towards the developers and their families. Evidence of Malice is required to sue someone, not simply a bad review (which may not be Evidence of Malice). What may be Evidence of Malice? Possibly a threat of death.
I suspect that there are more than 100 users that wrote bad reviews. The others were careful in their word choice and may avoid the semblance of Malice. Those who were not careful, may end up being sued.
You do not have to have malice to be able to sue people in the US sorry. All you have to do is prove slander or any other number of things that could be listed on the law suit. Ever wonder how all these frivolous law suits never go to trial or why. These guys have not even gone through the right channels to get a proper law suit to begin with. You need a judge to order steam to give anything up which I would have a hard time seeing that happen. They can ask and do whatever they want but unless actually ordered by the court steam is not required to do anything. Hell I can go fill out proper paperwork right now showing that I was offended by a shirt someone wore and sue someone, I would get laughed out of a courtroom but you can just about sue for anything at all. Normally the person that loses a lawsuit like this ends up paying the cost of both legal fees so it isn't a smart move on these guys part to begin with.
You are right @k61977, there is infact a long list of of other allegations not limited to Malice. Less than 30 are accused of making death threats. I chose to focus on Malice and death, to make it easier for our forum readers to comprehend that the issue here was not bad reviews. As so many wrongly thought.
True they haven't gone through the steps to begin a lawsuit against the 100 Steam users. But they did get a judge to order Steam to identify the 100 Steam users @Tiller posted a link, so everyone is seeing that happen. That lead to Steam removing all DH games from its site.
Let me make this perfectly clear, I don't agree, support, condone, or defend DH or its practices. I saw several of my fellow forum readers incorrectly interpreting the situation as being about negative review. I wanted them to understand that something more than negative a review was going on here. That's all I was trying to do.
BTW, it's funny you brought up the offending T-shirt. I was sued for that and lost back in the 90's. Are you doxxing me? O.o
if less then 30 is being sued for death threats, the main issue here is not the malice you mention for, the whole things is more of i'm but hurt and will make more people suffer, something like misery loves company, the main issue here is still his mark on sterling I don't get to read what 100 people wrote, so that is really a lesser issue, but if one poster I read said he is marked for that sue and that was only becuase he could be a competition, this make this thing all more sweat to see burn.
and what I can see now is the smaller backslash DH will get, steam removed his games, players aware of this will start to not even give then time to read about they games.
so pretty much he shot his own foot with this lawsuit
This may not be the turning point (it sounds too opportunistic for that), but sooner or later there will be precedent-setting case made over internet harassment and slander.
Far too many people believe they say can say absolutely anything on the internet and get away with it.
This may not be the turning point (it sounds too opportunistic for that), but sooner or later there will be precedent-setting case made over internet harassment and slander.
Far too many people believe they say can say absolutely anything on the internet and get away with it.
Unless there is webcam evidence or something of the sort, how the heck would you ever prove that the person in question actually was doing the harassing etc.
I would imagine it would take much much more than a single instance to ever build a case.
"Beyond a Reasonable Doubt" is pretty hard to achieve in this scenario.
This may not be the turning point (it sounds too opportunistic for that), but sooner or later there will be precedent-setting case made over internet harassment and slander.
Far too many people believe they say can say absolutely anything on the internet and get away with it.
Unless there is webcam evidence or something of the sort, how the heck would you ever prove that the person in question actually was doing the harassing etc.
I would imagine it would take much much more than a single instance to ever build a case.
"Beyond a Reasonable Doubt" is pretty hard to achieve in this scenario.
same could be said for every single word ever written down on anything be it a sheet of paper or a newspaper
Please do not respond to me, even if I ask you a question, its rhetorical.
This may not be the turning point (it sounds too opportunistic for that), but sooner or later there will be precedent-setting case made over internet harassment and slander.
Far too many people believe they say can say absolutely anything on the internet and get away with it.
Unless there is webcam evidence or something of the sort, how the heck would you ever prove that the person in question actually was doing the harassing etc.
I would imagine it would take much much more than a single instance to ever build a case.
"Beyond a Reasonable Doubt" is pretty hard to achieve in this scenario.
same could be said for every single word ever written down on anything be it a sheet of paper or a newspaper
Handwriting is fairly easy to identify, but type is much more difficult.
As I said it would take much more than a single instance to prove. There would have to be a history.
This may not be the turning point (it sounds too opportunistic for that), but sooner or later there will be precedent-setting case made over internet harassment and slander.
Far too many people believe they say can say absolutely anything on the internet and get away with it.
Unless there is webcam evidence or something of the sort, how the heck would you ever prove that the person in question actually was doing the harassing etc.
I would imagine it would take much much more than a single instance to ever build a case.
"Beyond a Reasonable Doubt" is pretty hard to achieve in this scenario.
If the threat came from your account and no one else has a believable reason to use your account to threaten someone then it's probably you that made the threat. Same thing that record and movie companies were doing to prove who actually illegally downloaded media. His lawyer could also do what they did and ask for a certain amount of money for damages to settle the case against them on a case by case basis.
Death threats placed on the internet can be there forever and may come back to haunt people. Going for a really great job with a company that does excellent internet searches on their applicants might turn up such behavior which could screw up a person's financial future. A case like this could reveal a person's real name and place it in public records.
"We all do the best we can based on life experience, point of view, and our ability to believe in ourselves." - Naropa "We don't see things as they are, we see them as we are." SR Covey
Comments
linkage http://mmofallout.com/james-romine-subpoenas-valve-for-steam-user-details/
http://www.bbc.com/news/technology-37407051
~~ postlarval ~~
¯\_(ツ)_/¯
I like how they are going to sue Valve but have not discussed anything with an actual lawyer. The last part of the news article says that they are requesting a lawyer contact them to help them with the suit.
In the prior subpoena on the Valve users and the suit against Jim Sterling they are representing themselves. Does this mean they could not find a lawyer to take the case? Probably.
Lots of grandstanding by these guys.
They should try another approach to make money.... make a good game that sells lots of copies and people enjoy. I know, it's a crazy thought!
@cheyane, and @Talonsin look up Internet Defamation possibly with a new search also. It has already started, laws are being changed or written for the first time to make what many feel as their freedom of speech on the internet, go away.
For example, but with no legal standing. Someone threatens another with death in a forum post. The suspect is identified. They could be turned over to the police, and/or a civil case can be brought up. A criminal case is very difficult to prove 100%, civil cases are xxxx...
Boy: Why can't I talk to Him?
Mom: We don't talk to Priests.
As if it could exist, without being payed for.
F2P means you get what you paid for. Pay nothing, get nothing.
Even telemarketers wouldn't think that.
It costs money to play. Therefore P2W.
Smile
- RPG Quiz - can you get all 25 right?
- FPS Quiz - how well do you know your shooters?
but good luck for Sterling when he sue then back after this lol
I suspect that there are more than 100 users that wrote bad reviews. The others were careful in their word choice and may avoid the semblance of Malice. Those who were not careful, may end up being sued.
Boy: Why can't I talk to Him?
Mom: We don't talk to Priests.
As if it could exist, without being payed for.
F2P means you get what you paid for. Pay nothing, get nothing.
Even telemarketers wouldn't think that.
It costs money to play. Therefore P2W.
In this case they have to proove that the company was affected by false statements.
Please do not respond to me, even if I ask you a question, its rhetorical.
Please do not respond to me
Really the only point I was trying to make was that this case is not about bad review. Still you gave an example of a suit regarding bad reviews. The only purpose that serves is confuse people who don't understand what is going on. Yes these 100 Steam users may have posted negative review, but that is not why they are being sued. And I want the forum readers here to understand that these 100 Steam users were not being sued for writing negative reviews, they wrote something more that got them into trouble.
You are again correct, this case is very complex IMO. But I still feel the first round will go in favor of Jim Sterling & YouTube, but against the 100 Steam users. IMO, they may even win their first appeals, but they will lose their final appeal.
Boy: Why can't I talk to Him?
Mom: We don't talk to Priests.
As if it could exist, without being payed for.
F2P means you get what you paid for. Pay nothing, get nothing.
Even telemarketers wouldn't think that.
It costs money to play. Therefore P2W.
True they haven't gone through the steps to begin a lawsuit against the 100 Steam users. But they did get a judge to order Steam to identify the 100 Steam users @Tiller posted a link, so everyone is seeing that happen. That lead to Steam removing all DH games from its site.
Let me make this perfectly clear, I don't agree, support, condone, or defend DH or its practices. I saw several of my fellow forum readers incorrectly interpreting the situation as being about negative review. I wanted them to understand that something more than negative a review was going on here. That's all I was trying to do.
BTW, it's funny you brought up the offending T-shirt. I was sued for that and lost back in the 90's. Are you doxxing me? O.o
Boy: Why can't I talk to Him?
Mom: We don't talk to Priests.
As if it could exist, without being payed for.
F2P means you get what you paid for. Pay nothing, get nothing.
Even telemarketers wouldn't think that.
It costs money to play. Therefore P2W.
and what I can see now is the smaller backslash DH will get, steam removed his games, players aware of this will start to not even give then time to read about they games.
so pretty much he shot his own foot with this lawsuit
Far too many people believe they say can say absolutely anything on the internet and get away with it.
I would imagine it would take much much more than a single instance to ever build a case.
"Beyond a Reasonable Doubt" is pretty hard to achieve in this scenario.
"Be water my friend" - Bruce Lee
Please do not respond to me, even if I ask you a question, its rhetorical.
Please do not respond to me
As I said it would take much more than a single instance to prove. There would have to be a history.
"Be water my friend" - Bruce Lee
Death threats placed on the internet can be there forever and may come back to haunt people. Going for a really great job with a company that does excellent internet searches on their applicants might turn up such behavior which could screw up a person's financial future. A case like this could reveal a person's real name and place it in public records.
"We all do the best we can based on life experience, point of view, and our ability to believe in ourselves." - Naropa "We don't see things as they are, we see them as we are." SR Covey