Originally posted by BaronJuJu Originally posted by ShadowLords JuJu you have yet today, in any thread, posted anything of any value. But you opinions/thoughts are fully appreciated.
And you have posted a steady stream of nonsense and rant with anyone who disagrees with you. Some kids just can't stand to be wrong eh?
Again you fail ... the only person I have disagreed with is you. and it all started by your example of lack of morals when you said it wasn't theft because the emu isn't legal. All I said was that they are separate situations that have no bearing with each other.
I post my age where is yours?
When people are losing an arguement they start calling their opponent "kid". And it is usually a "kid" calling the other a "kid".
Originally posted by ShadowLords Originally posted by BaronJuJu Originally posted by ShadowLords JuJu you have yet today, in any thread, posted anything of any value. But you opinions/thoughts are fully appreciated.
And you have posted a steady stream of nonsense and rant with anyone who disagrees with you. Some kids just can't stand to be wrong eh?
Again you fail ... the only person I have disagreed with is you. and it all started by your example of lack of morals when you said it wasn't theft because the emu isn't legal. All I said was that they are separate situations that have no bearing with each other.
I post my age where is yours?
When people are losing an arguement they start calling their opponent "kid". And it is usually a "kid" calling the other a "kid".
This is what you posted to start with:
Originally posted by BaronJuJu I was just wondering what they think they could charge this guy with if he did it? Not like this is actually a legit business with a very grey area as far as the legitimacy of EMU's. Sounds like drug users suing the dealer for stealing their money.
So two wrongs make a right?
Stealing "donated project money" is a separate Federal offense than "copyright" infringement. It is a federal offense due to the amount of money involved and because it involves bank accounts.
Lack of morals? I questions whether a "supposedly legit" operation can file charges on money stolen. Even you stated with your "two wrongs" statement that the EMU is copyright infrigment. Or did you have some other hidden meaning that you didn't state but imply?
You can't have a non legit business then state "Help we were robbed!"....Well actually you can but it won't get you very far.
I questioned SWGEMU's integrity, and I still do.
"If we don't attack them, they will attack us first. So we'd better retaliate before they have a chance to strike"
Originally posted by Rekrul Do not play the investigators here. Nobody knows what happened and posting the information like this is bad taste, possibly even an offense in itself, and just another impulse reaction that brings internal and in this case legal and authoritative affairs into general public.This is not how such occurances are handled. The names and events must never ever be released until the court case is completed. Period.
First trip to America? Because face it, we routinely convict people in the court of public opinion here before a jury is even picked. And every detail that CAN be published, IS published. Names and events are examined in minute detail if they're public record. The rare exception to this is sexual assault cases, where the victim's name is withheld by the press.
Otherwise, this kind of feeding frenzy is routine business, I don't know where you get the idea it's not.
Originally posted by Rekrul There is another issue here, and it once again involves PR. The old story of the last "insider" info is repeating itself.
What has happened has happened. But it is their internal affair.
By any and all democratic laws, person is innocent until proven guilty. Publishing names, addresses and other information about the person *ALLEGED* to have commited this is not right. Only court of law has the ability to determine whether someone is guilty or not by listening to both parties. Everything that has been posted is a severe violation of proper conduct in such cases.
Internal proceedings as to how this matter are handled are not to be disclosed to public. Names and relations with those *ALLEGED* of the felony or crime are not to be disclosed. The sequence of events that has lead to this is not to be disclosed by anyone except court of law.
The whole proceedings here are defamatory, and can be best described as incinuation to a lynch.
There is a reason why this is handled through authorites. This is a very huge PR blunder that may severly hurt an independant investigation.
But above all, this is not how such situations are handled. Period. No matter who's involved. Once again, it's a huge publicity stunt over a very dubious matter where only one side of the story is heard.
------------------------- Alternate storyline that fits into what was posted (my personal, unrelated to any fact): Two members of the team get into a dispute. Leader, who stays with the team takes some things too harsly. Person leaving drops every contact and moves on. Out of rage the leader takes the money, frames the evidence, then launches a defamatory campaign over their own media outlet in order to settle a personal dispute.
Why not? Nobody in general public knows what happens, this is why courts of law exist. This, at very best, is an attempt at hillbilly justice.
Do not play the investigators here. Nobody knows what happened and posting the information like this is bad taste, possibly even an offense in itself, and just another impulse reaction that brings internal and in this case legal and authoritative affairs into general public.
This is not how such occurances are handled.
The names and events must never ever be released until the court case is completed. Period.
QFE.
Could the SWGEMU website be held liable if something were to happen to either of the individuals named? I see folks passing out home address and have made some threatening statement towards the Joker and TMR.
The SWGEMU's response? Total silence
"If we don't attack them, they will attack us first. So we'd better retaliate before they have a chance to strike"
Originally posted by BaronJuJu Originally posted by ShadowLords Originally posted by BaronJuJu Originally posted by ShadowLords JuJu you have yet today, in any thread, posted anything of any value. But you opinions/thoughts are fully appreciated.
And you have posted a steady stream of nonsense and rant with anyone who disagrees with you. Some kids just can't stand to be wrong eh?
Again you fail ... the only person I have disagreed with is you. and it all started by your example of lack of morals when you said it wasn't theft because the emu isn't legal. All I said was that they are separate situations that have no bearing with each other.
I post my age where is yours?
When people are losing an arguement they start calling their opponent "kid". And it is usually a "kid" calling the other a "kid".
This is what you posted to start with:
Originally posted by BaronJuJu I was just wondering what they think they could charge this guy with if he did it? Not like this is actually a legit business with a very grey area as far as the legitimacy of EMU's. Sounds like drug users suing the dealer for stealing their money.
So two wrongs make a right?
Stealing "donated project money" is a separate Federal offense than "copyright" infringement. It is a federal offense due to the amount of money involved and because it involves bank accounts.
Lack of morals? I questions whether a "supposedly legit" operation can file charges on money stolen. Even you stated with your "two wrongs" statement that the EMU is copyright infrigment. Or did you have some other hidden meaning that you didn't state but imply?
You can't have a non legit business then state "Help we were robbed!"....Well actually you can but it won't get you very far.
I questioned SWGEMU's integrity, and I still do.
You are either incredibly stupid or incredibly immature. I don't know which because I dont know you.
If the money was infact stolen there are posts on the emu site telling people where and how to make donations. Obviously you have assumed they were making donations to Jokers pocketbook and not the project. If one is to believe the donations they made were for the project (Legality of the project is separate. all that matters is what the intent was for those making donations.) and someone runs off with the money. That my friend is theft. if you can't see that then it is you with the problem.
Please feel free to continue this conversation with yourself. I prefer debating with people that can reason.
First trip to America? Because face it, we routinely convict people in the court of public opinion here before a jury is even picked. And every detail that CAN be published, IS published. Names and events are examined in minute detail if they're public record. The rare exception to this is sexual assault cases, where the victim's name is withheld by the press.
Otherwise, this kind of feeding frenzy is routine business, I don't know where you get the idea it's not.
No, about 11 total, I think.
But seriously, what happened here is an issue. From my perspective, this is encouraging a lynch.
None of the information here is public record. None. Public records are the information submitted to courts. Where is the legal filling, the court proceedings, or even the police record? Nothing is factual, it's defamatory campaign. legalities are all about details, not spewing out random hearsay.
There was an example like that before involving one of p2p sites. In that case, the lawyers allegedly sued the site owner, and he asked for donations for legal affairs.
One day, the site was gone, owner vanished with the money.
The PR statement that was made was formed directly from the information as it was submitted to the court. It didn't name names or any other details.
Back to case at hand.
The events are completely outlined. Joker is the perpetrator, the other guy acomplice.
WRONG. WRONG. WRONG. WRONG.
They are ALLEGED until proved guilty in court of law. Just because a sleazy reporter makes a show story does not only not make it legal, but it exposes that reporter to legal action. In addition, those reporters know how to dodge the law and they do get sued and pay the fines. But fines are usually included in the operation costs.
This press release is all ALLEGATIONS. Nobody is guilty of anything, nobody did anything. They ALLEGEDLY did something. It's up to police to determine what happened, and up to courts to decide if laws were violated.
The press release as it stands is a defamatory campaign. As a matter of fact, I'd have my attorney use that as a counter case to prove everything was staged from beginning, then I'd counter sue for damages. With all the legal rights, this case is more likely to win.
Seriously, this is WRONG. This has nothing to do with emu guys or some random shmuck. Regardless of who they are, such statement must contain the word ALLEGED on each and every point.
Originally posted by BaronJuJu Originally posted by Rekrul
QFE.
Could the SWGEMU website be held liable if something were to happen to either of the individuals named? I see folks passing out home address and have made some threatening statement towards the Joker and TMR.
Yes. Default lawsuits for slander, defamation of name, violation of privacy by exposing personal information and more.
This lawsuit could be won by default without regard to anything else, even if some of the events posted were to be proven true and accurate.
Originally posted by Rekrul Originally posted by BaronJuJu Originally posted by Rekrul
QFE.
Could the SWGEMU website be held liable if something were to happen to either of the individuals named? I see folks passing out home address and have made some threatening statement towards the Joker and TMR.
Yes. Default lawsuits for slander, defamation of name, violation of privacy by exposing personal information and more.
This lawsuit could be won by default without regard to anything else, even if some of the events posted were to be proven true and accurate.
Don't joke about stuff like that.
Someone may want to inform the EMU site
"If we don't attack them, they will attack us first. So we'd better retaliate before they have a chance to strike"
Originally posted by Rekrul The press release as it stands is a defamatory campaign. As a matter of fact, I'd have my attorney use that as a counter case to prove everything was staged from beginning, then I'd counter sue for damages. With all the legal rights, this case is more likely to win.Seriously, this is WRONG. This has nothing to do with emu guys or some random shmuck. Regardless of who they are, such statement must contain the word ALLEGED on each and every point.
Well, without knowing whether it's true one way or another, I can still assure you that the truth is an absolute defense to defamation ... so the original publisher may have felt completely safe in saying what they did because of a knowledge (or genuine belief) that it was true.
Moreover, it's possible that Joker, through previous public postings and statements, made himself a 'public figure' with even LESS protection from defamation, where statements about him would only be actionable if the publisher KNEW them to be false and published them with malicious intent.
Regardless, my point was that any assertion that people "normally" refrain from discussing and speculating on details of such crimes before everyting is PROVEN beyond a reasonable doubt in court is pretty damn naive. They don't. Not in this country, not in the Internet age, not hardly anywhere. Whether it's desirable that they SHOULD refrain from such discussion is a different issue, but usually they DON'T.
Originally posted by Rekrul The press release as it stands is a defamatory campaign. As a matter of fact, I'd have my attorney use that as a counter case to prove everything was staged from beginning, then I'd counter sue for damages. With all the legal rights, this case is more likely to win.Seriously, this is WRONG. This has nothing to do with emu guys or some random shmuck. Regardless of who they are, such statement must contain the word ALLEGED on each and every point.
Well, without knowing whether it's true one way or another, I can still assure you that the truth is an absolute defense to defamation ... so the original publisher may have felt completely safe in saying what they did because of a knowledge (or genuine belief) that it was true.
There is no "truth".
Police receives a report. They examine the evidence. They interrogate the suspects. Based on that, they submit the case to the court, listing possible felony or crime. Court performs hearings and cross-examines the evidence. Jury or the judge meet the final decision.
There is no other truth than court's decision. This isn't campaign for righteousness. It's alleged crime.
This is why courts exist.
Case 1) The paypal account got hacked. Case 2) The alleged person indeed stole the money Case 3) This is hate capaign based on personal issues Case 4) Random person framed the alleged perpetrator Case 5) None of it is true and moeny is still there Case 6) PayPal goofed up and pasword no longer works Case 7) No money was ever donated Case 8) This is SOE's smear campaign Case 9) It's a conspiracy by entire team to steal the money Caseo 10) ...
Originally posted by Rekrul There is no "truth".Police receives a report.They examine the evidence.They interrogate the suspects.Based on that, they submit the case to the court, listing possible felony or crime.Court performs hearings and cross-examines the evidence.Jury or the judge meet the final decision.There is no other truth than court's decision. This isn't campaign for righteousness. It's alleged crime.This is why courts exist.Case 1) The paypal account got hacked.Case 2) The alleged person indeed stole the moneyCase 3) This is hate capaign based on personal issuesCase 4) Random person framed the alleged perpetratorCase 5) None of it is true and moeny is still thereCase 6) PayPal goofed up and pasword no longer worksCase 7) No money was ever donatedCase 8) This is SOE's smear campaignCase 9) It's a conspiracy by entire team to steal the moneyCaseo 10) ...Need I go on? THERE IS NO TRUTH.
You really want to avoid throwing around words like 'defamatory' without understanding the legal meaning of the term ..... or really anything about American jurisprudence, apparently.
You really want to avoid throwing around words like 'defamatory' without understanding the legal meaning of the term ..... or really anything about American jurisprudence, apparently.
At first you confused me a bit, so I double checked it, in case I misunderstoor it:
In law, defamation is a right of action for communicating statements that may harm of an individual's reputation or character. The common law origins of defamation lie in the torts of slander (harmful statement in a transitory form, esp. speech) and libel (harmful statement in a fixed medium, esp. writing but also a picture, sign, or electronic broadcast), each which give a common law rights of action.
If they had reported: After our donation's account has been made innaccesible, we contacted the police. They started investigation into suspected theft. Currently, two people, "name a" and "name b" are being investigated for possible connection with the crime.
Then it would have been ok. But the statement as it's made it's not.
If they had reported:After our donation's account has been made innaccesible, we contacted the police. They started investigation into suspected theft. Currently, two people, "name a" and "name b" are being investigated for possible connection with the crime.Then it would have been ok. But the statement as it's made it's not.
Nice theoretical approach .... never happens in this country, however. Ask the Ramseys.
If they say 'We think that bastage [NAME] stole it' and it ends up that he did steal it, they have no concerns about defamation or libel. If he didn't steal it and they acted in reckless disregard of whether he really did, then they're possibly on the hook for defamation.
Remember all those millions O.J. collected for people saying he had something to do with the crime? Probably not, because he didn't collect a dime.
If they had reported:After our donation's account has been made innaccesible, we contacted the police. They started investigation into suspected theft. Currently, two people, "name a" and "name b" are being investigated for possible connection with the crime.Then it would have been ok. But the statement as it's made it's not.
Nice theoretical approach .... never happens in this country, however. Ask the Ramseys.
If they say 'We think that bastage [NAME] stole it' and it ends up that he did steal it, they have no concerns about defamation or libel. If he didn't steal it and they acted in reckless disregard of whether he really did, then they're possibly on the hook for defamation.
Remember all those millions O.J. collected for people saying he had something to do with the crime? Probably not, because he didn't collect a dime.
Not theoretical...just how it should go. *Edit - Hence your term theoretical.....LOL, been a long day. Sorry about that
Unfortunately you are right, most folks throw their case to the public courts before the "facts" are made known.
"If we don't attack them, they will attack us first. So we'd better retaliate before they have a chance to strike"
If they had reported:After our donation's account has been made innaccesible, we contacted the police. They started investigation into suspected theft. Currently, two people, "name a" and "name b" are being investigated for possible connection with the crime.Then it would have been ok. But the statement as it's made it's not.
Nice theoretical approach .... never happens in this country, however. Ask the Ramseys.
If they say 'We think that bastage [NAME] stole it' and it ends up that he did steal it, they have no concerns about defamation or libel. If he didn't steal it and they acted in reckless disregard of whether he really did, then they're possibly on the hook for defamation.
Remember all those millions O.J. collected for people saying he had something to do with the crime? Probably not, because he didn't collect a dime.
That was exactly my point. Statements must indeed be proven to be false, but this doesn't exclude their liability.
And does rarely in this case refer to high profile televised court cases, or the hundreds of thousands of cases handled yearly out of media?
This case is not OJ Simpson trial.
And as of yet, no charges have been raised, mind you. It's questionable whether even police concluded the preliminaries and if the paperwork has been filed.
In all those cases, the media frenzy started based entirely and solely on documentation that was released through courts. After that speculations began, but only after charges have been raised.
Originally posted by Rekrul Originally posted by KzinKiller
Originally posted by Rekrul
If they had reported:After our donation's account has been made innaccesible, we contacted the police. They started investigation into suspected theft. Currently, two people, "name a" and "name b" are being investigated for possible connection with the crime.Then it would have been ok. But the statement as it's made it's not.
Nice theoretical approach .... never happens in this country, however. Ask the Ramseys.
If they say 'We think that bastage [NAME] stole it' and it ends up that he did steal it, they have no concerns about defamation or libel. If he didn't steal it and they acted in reckless disregard of whether he really did, then they're possibly on the hook for defamation.
Remember all those millions O.J. collected for people saying he had something to do with the crime? Probably not, because he didn't collect a dime.
That was exactly my point. Statements must indeed be proven to be false, but this doesn't exclude their liability.
And does rarely in this case refer to high profile televised court cases, or the hundreds of thousands of cases handled yearly out of media?
This case is not OJ Simpson trial.
And as of yet, no charges have been raised, mind you. It's questionable whether even police concluded the preliminaries and if the paperwork has been filed.
In all those cases, the media frenzy started based entirely and solely on documentation that was released through courts. After that speculations began, but only after charges have been raised.
This is not the case here.
If you want to see a court of public opinion in action go watch the EMU board right now, Joker is supposedly on their IRC chat talking to them. and see the folks reactions to the supposed statements by him.
"If we don't attack them, they will attack us first. So we'd better retaliate before they have a chance to strike"
Originally posted by Obraik Yet another reason not to play an EMU server...
Employee theft is a common thing. It happens all the time and in every business. If you read the numbers of thefts every year and how many were employee theft I am sure you'd be surprised.
So you need to stop going to the store since your store probably has that issue. Also no trips to the mall. Oh and dont go see any movies since employee theft in movie houses is rampant. No more gamestores or video stores either. Basically go live in a cave somewhere and never ever enter any city or town again.......
If you want to see a court of public opinion in action go watch the EMU board right now, Joker is supposedly on their IRC chat talking to them. and see the folks reactions to the supposed statements by him.
For the better of many people, this better have turned out they described, because of all that they've made available now this is a disaster. The lynch mob is indeed underway.
Those people seriously lack common sense, no other way to put it.
Originally posted by kaibigan34 Originally posted by Obraik Yet another reason not to play an EMU server...
Employee theft is a common thing. It happens all the time and in every business. If you read the numbers of thefts every year and how many were employee theft I am sure you'd be surprised.
So you need to stop going to the store since your store probably has that issue. Also no trips to the mall. Oh and dont go see any movies since employee theft in movie houses is rampant. No more gamestores or video stores either. Basically go live in a cave somewhere and never ever enter any city or town again.......
Kai
And for this very reason every reasonable company has security escort people out of the building after they've been fired.
It's kinda humiliating, but because it happens so often, it's necessary.
Originally posted by Rekrul Originally posted by BaronJuJu
If you want to see a court of public opinion in action go watch the EMU board right now, Joker is supposedly on their IRC chat talking to them. and see the folks reactions to the supposed statements by him.
For the better of many people, this better have turned out they described, because of all that they've made available now this is a disaster. The lynch mob is indeed underway.
Those people seriously lack common sense, no other way to put it.
Yup, I think he (Joker) has a good case just looking at that site. I am still surprised the EMU staff hasn't come out and told them to shut the hell up.
"If we don't attack them, they will attack us first. So we'd better retaliate before they have a chance to strike"
Originally posted by Rekrul Originally posted by kaibigan34 Originally posted by Obraik Yet another reason not to play an EMU server...
Employee theft is a common thing. It happens all the time and in every business. If you read the numbers of thefts every year and how many were employee theft I am sure you'd be surprised.
So you need to stop going to the store since your store probably has that issue. Also no trips to the mall. Oh and dont go see any movies since employee theft in movie houses is rampant. No more gamestores or video stores either. Basically go live in a cave somewhere and never ever enter any city or town again.......
Kai
And for this very reason every reasonable company has security escort people out of the building after they've been fired.
It's kinda humiliating, but because it happens so often, it's necessary.
I used to do that very job. Back in my days of skip tracing and PI work I also did Loss and Prevention for a major department store chain. One of our duties was to escort people out who were fired.
The store I worked for had an 11% loss to theft annually. It was so common that they had to incorporate it into their income rates. They would allocate 15% to theft every year. Now you would think that was mainly customers. But the loss was actually 70% in house.
The thing I found rather hypocritical was that most stores would prosecute a shoplifter in a heartbeat but an employee they caught stealing would just get fired.
Originally posted by kaibigan34 Originally posted by Rekrul Originally posted by kaibigan34 Originally posted by Obraik Yet another reason not to play an EMU server...
Employee theft is a common thing. It happens all the time and in every business. If you read the numbers of thefts every year and how many were employee theft I am sure you'd be surprised.
So you need to stop going to the store since your store probably has that issue. Also no trips to the mall. Oh and dont go see any movies since employee theft in movie houses is rampant. No more gamestores or video stores either. Basically go live in a cave somewhere and never ever enter any city or town again.......
Kai
And for this very reason every reasonable company has security escort people out of the building after they've been fired.
It's kinda humiliating, but because it happens so often, it's necessary.
I used to do that very job. Back in my days of skip tracing and PI work I also did Loss and Prevention for a major department store chain. One of our duties was to escort people out who were fired.
The store I worked for had an 11% loss to theft annually. It was so common that they had to incorporate it into their income rates. They would allocate 15% to theft every year. Now you would think that was mainly customers. But the loss was actually 70% in house.
The thing I found rather hypocritical was that most stores would prosecute a shoplifter in a heartbeat but an employee they caught stealing would just get fired.
Kai
Yes this is all true , But you can't really compare stealing Corporate profit to , Stealing Donated money . This wasn't store money that was stolen if true , This is customer/Donated money . Taking donated money and running is a pretty hefty offence . 90% of the people who do so , Are never brought to trial sadly . But the moral disregard in such an action speaks clearly of such a person .
Sure you risk little playing on an emulated server. Yet giving money to anyone , Is always a huge risk .Especially if they state it's for non-profit reasons .
For every minute you are angry , you lose 60 seconds of happiness."-Emerson
You guys still want to support this little "project"? Heh...suckers, all ya'll.
Its just a coverup/scam to get you people to dump more money in their pockets, then the process will repeat itself, "douchebagdev02 stolt R lewt fuken fag, plz donate more plzkthx".
"There's no star system Slave I can't reach, and there's no planet I can't find. There's nowhere in the Galaxy for you to run. Might as well give up now." Boba Fett
Comments
"If we don't attack them, they will attack us first. So we'd better retaliate before they have a chance to strike"
And you have posted a steady stream of nonsense and rant with anyone who disagrees with you. Some kids just can't stand to be wrong eh?
Again you fail ... the only person I have disagreed with is you. and it all started by your example of lack of morals when you said it wasn't theft because the emu isn't legal. All I said was that they are separate situations that have no bearing with each other.
I post my age where is yours?
When people are losing an arguement they start calling their opponent "kid". And it is usually a "kid" calling the other a "kid".
And you have posted a steady stream of nonsense and rant with anyone who disagrees with you. Some kids just can't stand to be wrong eh?
Again you fail ... the only person I have disagreed with is you. and it all started by your example of lack of morals when you said it wasn't theft because the emu isn't legal. All I said was that they are separate situations that have no bearing with each other.
I post my age where is yours?
When people are losing an arguement they start calling their opponent "kid". And it is usually a "kid" calling the other a "kid".
This is what you posted to start with:
So two wrongs make a right?
Stealing "donated project money" is a separate Federal offense than "copyright" infringement. It is a federal offense due to the amount of money involved and because it involves bank accounts.
Lack of morals? I questions whether a "supposedly legit" operation can file charges on money stolen. Even you stated with your "two wrongs" statement that the EMU is copyright infrigment. Or did you have some other hidden meaning that you didn't state but imply?
You can't have a non legit business then state "Help we were robbed!"....Well actually you can but it won't get you very far.
I questioned SWGEMU's integrity, and I still do.
"If we don't attack them, they will attack us first. So we'd better retaliate before they have a chance to strike"
Otherwise, this kind of feeding frenzy is routine business, I don't know where you get the idea it's not.
QFE.
Could the SWGEMU website be held liable if something were to happen to either of the individuals named? I see folks passing out home address and have made some threatening statement towards the Joker and TMR.
The SWGEMU's response? Total silence
"If we don't attack them, they will attack us first. So we'd better retaliate before they have a chance to strike"
And you have posted a steady stream of nonsense and rant with anyone who disagrees with you. Some kids just can't stand to be wrong eh?
Again you fail ... the only person I have disagreed with is you. and it all started by your example of lack of morals when you said it wasn't theft because the emu isn't legal. All I said was that they are separate situations that have no bearing with each other.
I post my age where is yours?
When people are losing an arguement they start calling their opponent "kid". And it is usually a "kid" calling the other a "kid".
This is what you posted to start with:
So two wrongs make a right?
Stealing "donated project money" is a separate Federal offense than "copyright" infringement. It is a federal offense due to the amount of money involved and because it involves bank accounts.
Lack of morals? I questions whether a "supposedly legit" operation can file charges on money stolen. Even you stated with your "two wrongs" statement that the EMU is copyright infrigment. Or did you have some other hidden meaning that you didn't state but imply?
You can't have a non legit business then state "Help we were robbed!"....Well actually you can but it won't get you very far.
I questioned SWGEMU's integrity, and I still do.
You are either incredibly stupid or incredibly immature. I don't know which because I dont know you.
If the money was infact stolen there are posts on the emu site telling people where and how to make donations. Obviously you have assumed they were making donations to Jokers pocketbook and not the project. If one is to believe the donations they made were for the project (Legality of the project is separate. all that matters is what the intent was for those making donations.) and someone runs off with the money. That my friend is theft. if you can't see that then it is you with the problem.
Please feel free to continue this conversation with yourself. I prefer debating with people that can reason.
But seriously, what happened here is an issue. From my perspective, this is encouraging a lynch.
None of the information here is public record. None. Public records are the information submitted to courts. Where is the legal filling, the court proceedings, or even the police record? Nothing is factual, it's defamatory campaign. legalities are all about details, not spewing out random hearsay.
There was an example like that before involving one of p2p sites. In that case, the lawyers allegedly sued the site owner, and he asked for donations for legal affairs.
One day, the site was gone, owner vanished with the money.
The PR statement that was made was formed directly from the information as it was submitted to the court. It didn't name names or any other details.
Back to case at hand.
The events are completely outlined. Joker is the perpetrator, the other guy acomplice.
WRONG. WRONG. WRONG. WRONG.
They are ALLEGED until proved guilty in court of law. Just because a sleazy reporter makes a show story does not only not make it legal, but it exposes that reporter to legal action. In addition, those reporters know how to dodge the law and they do get sued and pay the fines. But fines are usually included in the operation costs.
This press release is all ALLEGATIONS. Nobody is guilty of anything, nobody did anything. They ALLEGEDLY did something. It's up to police to determine what happened, and up to courts to decide if laws were violated.
The press release as it stands is a defamatory campaign. As a matter of fact, I'd have my attorney use that as a counter case to prove everything was staged from beginning, then I'd counter sue for damages. With all the legal rights, this case is more likely to win.
Seriously, this is WRONG. This has nothing to do with emu guys or some random shmuck. Regardless of who they are, such statement must contain the word ALLEGED on each and every point.
QFE.
Could the SWGEMU website be held liable if something were to happen to either of the individuals named? I see folks passing out home address and have made some threatening statement towards the Joker and TMR.
Yes. Default lawsuits for slander, defamation of name, violation of privacy by exposing personal information and more.
This lawsuit could be won by default without regard to anything else, even if some of the events posted were to be proven true and accurate.
Don't joke about stuff like that.
QFE.
Could the SWGEMU website be held liable if something were to happen to either of the individuals named? I see folks passing out home address and have made some threatening statement towards the Joker and TMR.
Yes. Default lawsuits for slander, defamation of name, violation of privacy by exposing personal information and more.
This lawsuit could be won by default without regard to anything else, even if some of the events posted were to be proven true and accurate.
Don't joke about stuff like that.
Someone may want to inform the EMU site
"If we don't attack them, they will attack us first. So we'd better retaliate before they have a chance to strike"
Moreover, it's possible that Joker, through previous public postings and statements, made himself a 'public figure' with even LESS protection from defamation, where statements about him would only be actionable if the publisher KNEW them to be false and published them with malicious intent.
Regardless, my point was that any assertion that people "normally" refrain from discussing and speculating on details of such crimes before everyting is PROVEN beyond a reasonable doubt in court is pretty damn naive. They don't. Not in this country, not in the Internet age, not hardly anywhere. Whether it's desirable that they SHOULD refrain from such discussion is a different issue, but usually they DON'T.
There is no "truth".
Police receives a report.
They examine the evidence.
They interrogate the suspects.
Based on that, they submit the case to the court, listing possible felony or crime.
Court performs hearings and cross-examines the evidence.
Jury or the judge meet the final decision.
There is no other truth than court's decision. This isn't campaign for righteousness. It's alleged crime.
This is why courts exist.
Case 1) The paypal account got hacked.
Case 2) The alleged person indeed stole the money
Case 3) This is hate capaign based on personal issues
Case 4) Random person framed the alleged perpetrator
Case 5) None of it is true and moeny is still there
Case 6) PayPal goofed up and pasword no longer works
Case 7) No money was ever donated
Case 8) This is SOE's smear campaign
Case 9) It's a conspiracy by entire team to steal the money
Caseo 10) ...
Need I go on?
THERE IS NO TRUTH.
At first you confused me a bit, so I double checked it, in case I misunderstoor it:
In law, defamation is a right of action for communicating statements that may harm of an individual's reputation or character. The common law origins of defamation lie in the torts of slander (harmful statement in a transitory form, esp. speech) and libel
(harmful statement in a fixed medium, esp. writing but also a picture,
sign, or electronic broadcast), each which give a common law rights of
action.
If they had reported:
After our donation's account has been made innaccesible, we contacted the police. They started investigation into suspected theft. Currently, two people, "name a" and "name b" are being investigated for possible connection with the crime.
Then it would have been ok. But the statement as it's made it's not.
If they say 'We think that bastage [NAME] stole it' and it ends up that he did steal it, they have no concerns about defamation or libel. If he didn't steal it and they acted in reckless disregard of whether he really did, then they're possibly on the hook for defamation.
Remember all those millions O.J. collected for people saying he had something to do with the crime? Probably not, because he didn't collect a dime.
If they say 'We think that bastage [NAME] stole it' and it ends up that he did steal it, they have no concerns about defamation or libel. If he didn't steal it and they acted in reckless disregard of whether he really did, then they're possibly on the hook for defamation.
Remember all those millions O.J. collected for people saying he had something to do with the crime? Probably not, because he didn't collect a dime.
Not theoretical...just how it should go. *Edit - Hence your term theoretical.....LOL, been a long day. Sorry about that
Unfortunately you are right, most folks throw their case to the public courts before the "facts" are made known.
"If we don't attack them, they will attack us first. So we'd better retaliate before they have a chance to strike"
If they say 'We think that bastage [NAME] stole it' and it ends up that he did steal it, they have no concerns about defamation or libel. If he didn't steal it and they acted in reckless disregard of whether he really did, then they're possibly on the hook for defamation.
Remember all those millions O.J. collected for people saying he had something to do with the crime? Probably not, because he didn't collect a dime.
That was exactly my point. Statements must indeed be proven to be false, but this doesn't exclude their liability.
And does rarely in this case refer to high profile televised court cases, or the hundreds of thousands of cases handled yearly out of media?
This case is not OJ Simpson trial.
And as of yet, no charges have been raised, mind you. It's questionable whether even police concluded the preliminaries and if the paperwork has been filed.
In all those cases, the media frenzy started based entirely and solely on documentation that was released through courts. After that speculations began, but only after charges have been raised.
This is not the case here.
If they say 'We think that bastage [NAME] stole it' and it ends up that he did steal it, they have no concerns about defamation or libel. If he didn't steal it and they acted in reckless disregard of whether he really did, then they're possibly on the hook for defamation.
Remember all those millions O.J. collected for people saying he had something to do with the crime? Probably not, because he didn't collect a dime.
That was exactly my point. Statements must indeed be proven to be false, but this doesn't exclude their liability.
And does rarely in this case refer to high profile televised court cases, or the hundreds of thousands of cases handled yearly out of media?
This case is not OJ Simpson trial.
And as of yet, no charges have been raised, mind you. It's questionable whether even police concluded the preliminaries and if the paperwork has been filed.
In all those cases, the media frenzy started based entirely and solely on documentation that was released through courts. After that speculations began, but only after charges have been raised.
This is not the case here.
If you want to see a court of public opinion in action go watch the EMU board right now, Joker is supposedly on their IRC chat talking to them. and see the folks reactions to the supposed statements by him.
"If we don't attack them, they will attack us first. So we'd better retaliate before they have a chance to strike"
So you need to stop going to the store since your store probably has that issue. Also no trips to the mall. Oh and dont go see any movies since employee theft in movie houses is rampant. No more gamestores or video stores either. Basically go live in a cave somewhere and never ever enter any city or town again.......
Kai
For the better of many people, this better have turned out they described, because of all that they've made available now this is a disaster. The lynch mob is indeed underway.
Those people seriously lack common sense, no other way to put it.
So you need to stop going to the store since your store probably has that issue. Also no trips to the mall. Oh and dont go see any movies since employee theft in movie houses is rampant. No more gamestores or video stores either. Basically go live in a cave somewhere and never ever enter any city or town again.......
Kai
And for this very reason every reasonable company has security escort people out of the building after they've been fired.
It's kinda humiliating, but because it happens so often, it's necessary.
For the better of many people, this better have turned out they described, because of all that they've made available now this is a disaster. The lynch mob is indeed underway.
Those people seriously lack common sense, no other way to put it.
Yup, I think he (Joker) has a good case just looking at that site. I am still surprised the EMU staff hasn't come out and told them to shut the hell up.
"If we don't attack them, they will attack us first. So we'd better retaliate before they have a chance to strike"
So you need to stop going to the store since your store probably has that issue. Also no trips to the mall. Oh and dont go see any movies since employee theft in movie houses is rampant. No more gamestores or video stores either. Basically go live in a cave somewhere and never ever enter any city or town again.......
Kai
And for this very reason every reasonable company has security escort people out of the building after they've been fired.
It's kinda humiliating, but because it happens so often, it's necessary.
I used to do that very job. Back in my days of skip tracing and PI work I also did Loss and Prevention for a major department store chain. One of our duties was to escort people out who were fired.
The store I worked for had an 11% loss to theft annually. It was so common that they had to incorporate it into their income rates. They would allocate 15% to theft every year. Now you would think that was mainly customers. But the loss was actually 70% in house.
The thing I found rather hypocritical was that most stores would prosecute a shoplifter in a heartbeat but an employee they caught stealing would just get fired.
Kai
LOL more like another reason added to the million plus out there not to play SWG or any SOE related project all...
We're sitting in our offices thinking of ways to upset our paying customers. I think were on track to meet that goal.
John Smedley
So you need to stop going to the store since your store probably has that issue. Also no trips to the mall. Oh and dont go see any movies since employee theft in movie houses is rampant. No more gamestores or video stores either. Basically go live in a cave somewhere and never ever enter any city or town again.......
Kai
And for this very reason every reasonable company has security escort people out of the building after they've been fired.
It's kinda humiliating, but because it happens so often, it's necessary.
I used to do that very job. Back in my days of skip tracing and PI work I also did Loss and Prevention for a major department store chain. One of our duties was to escort people out who were fired.
The store I worked for had an 11% loss to theft annually. It was so common that they had to incorporate it into their income rates. They would allocate 15% to theft every year. Now you would think that was mainly customers. But the loss was actually 70% in house.
The thing I found rather hypocritical was that most stores would prosecute a shoplifter in a heartbeat but an employee they caught stealing would just get fired.
Kai
Yes this is all true , But you can't really compare stealing Corporate profit to , Stealing Donated money . This wasn't store money that was stolen if true , This is customer/Donated money . Taking donated money and running is a pretty hefty offence . 90% of the people who do so , Are never brought to trial sadly . But the moral disregard in such an action speaks clearly of such a person .
Sure you risk little playing on an emulated server. Yet giving money to anyone , Is always a huge risk .Especially if they state it's for non-profit reasons .
For every minute you are angry , you lose 60 seconds of happiness."-Emerson
You guys still want to support this little "project"? Heh...suckers, all ya'll.
Its just a coverup/scam to get you people to dump more money in their pockets, then the process will repeat itself, "douchebagdev02 stolt R lewt fuken fag, plz donate more plzkthx".
"There's no star system Slave I can't reach, and there's no planet I can't find. There's nowhere in the Galaxy for you to run. Might as well give up now."
Boba Fett