I wouldn't be surprised.Whats next? The judge sides with Valve.
"Digital Homicide sues Judge of DH vs Valve Case"
I wouldn't be surprised.Whats next? The judge sides with Valve.
"Digital Homicide sues Judge of DH vs Valve Case"
Whats next? The judge sides with Valve.
"Digital Homicide sues Judge of DH vs Valve Case"
Well, I'm gonna be the one that says it... he kinda has a point.
Sounds to me like there are some legitimate cases of harrassment and Steam support did nothing for him.
And, lets face it... Steam support is shitty and that is bound to bite Valve in the ass sooner or later.
Steam was quick to remove that one developer for saying he wanted to murder Gabe. Why wouldn't they ban that one guy in the OP that basically says the same thing?
Doesn't seem like they could ban these people. If you're making death threats, maybe you deserve to be banned from Steam completely.But DH themselves could ban the people sending death threats, unless Gabe sued that developer DH could have done the same thing.
Doesn't seem like they could ban these people. If you're making death threats, maybe you deserve to be banned from Steam completely.
In any case, making death threats is illegal and DH is in their rights to pursue this in the courts.
I think that DH has a despicable business model, but they're in their right to make shitty games and to sell them. Steam now has refunds, so anyone suckered by their games can get their money back. If they're still in business, there must be a market for their games.
Erm. if you go into a casino threatening to throw fists with anyone how even looks at you, and then the bouncers kick you out, what recourse do you have?
I wonder if Jim will be able to do an episode about this.
You are making two completely different arguments. First you said they were being bullied and something should be done about it. Someone points out that if you're selling a product make it good because if it's not people as is their right will say your product is complete garbage and then your argument changed to its not a free market (why?) even though exactly what happens in a free market happened. Someone creates a product, finds a retailer to sell said product, customers buy, give feedback, retailer deems (for whatever reason they feel necessary within the bounds of the deal between the two parties, in this case for protecting their customers) that they no longer want to sell the product.Hey, if Valve wants to put an official seal of approval on games, then that's one thing. Steam allows shovel ware by the mountain loads. If it's not really a free market, then maybe it needs to be addressed more.
That analogy is soooo wrong.
More like you walk in to a casino and a random dude threatens to kill you and hurls abuse at your family. Then the bouncer throws you out for threatening to throw fists at the dude in retaliation.
Steam need to sort out the trolls!
Your analogy works if we consider that the person that walks into the casino is dressed on a garbage bag, with his dick out and is trying to gamble using chips made of his own feces.
I am hoping a judge throws everything out before any steam user needs to throw up a defense or settle.The issue is that their plan is more than likely to force the Steam users to settle since most of them probably can't afford a lawyer. DH more than likely knows that they have no case. They just want to force people to pay them because they have no money.
Doesn't seem like they could ban these people. If you're making death threats, maybe you deserve to be banned from Steam completely.
In any case, making death threats is illegal and DH is in their rights to pursue this in the courts.
I think that DH has a despicable business model, but they're in their right to make shitty games and to sell them. Steam now has refunds, so anyone suckered by their games can get their money back. If they're still in business, there must be a market for their games.
That analogy is soooo wrong.
More like you walk in to a casino and a random dude threatens to kill you and hurls abuse at your family. Then the bouncer throws you out for threatening to throw fists at the dude in retaliation.
Steam need to sort out the trolls!
Except DH (according to the court case evidence) is going after people saying things like "I'm getting the popcorn ready", "pirated asset flips" (DH love this one...as they buy the assets so it isn't piracy) and "We need to get Jim fucking Sterling son onto this" and then some really weird bits of evidence like a gleam.io giveaway for freebie (I'm guessing they're trying to throw anyone who said anything about keys for greenlight page visits under the bus).In any case, making death threats is illegal and DH is in their rights to pursue this in the courts.
If there were death threats, then that is an issue. As far as comments or reviews saying a game is terrible and don't buy it, they cannot sue for that. It would be like Columbia Pictures trying to sue critics for their reviews of Ghostbusters saying they did not make the money they should have because reviews hurt ticket sales. Not gonna happen do to the first amendment.
If there were death threats, then that is an issue. As far as comments or reviews saying a game is terrible and don't buy it, they cannot sue for that. It would be like Columbia Pictures trying to sue critics for their reviews of Ghostbusters saying they did not make the money they should have because reviews hurt ticket sales. Not gonna happen do to the first amendment.
The scariest thing from this whole Digital Homicide saga over the last couple years?? The dude has 3 kids...........
By removing us they have taken the stance that users have the right to harass me, tell me I should kill myself, and insult my family . If I try to defend myself against said actions then I lose my family's income.
They're gonna hit bedrock if they keep digging that hole any farther.
Jimquisition today has some nods to all this in a subtle way.
At this rate they'll just get into massive debt from lawyer fees. They're getting quite desperate if they're resorting to highlighting those posts, and cryinging that all of this is unfair. What a bunch of babies.
They're going to have to pay Jim Sterling lawyers when they inevatably lose their case.Except they don't have any lawyers. They represent themselves.
YOU AND VALVE AGREE TO RESOLVE ALL DISPUTES AND CLAIMS BETWEEN US IN INDIVIDUAL BINDING ARBITRATION. THAT INCLUDES, BUT IS NOT LIMITED TO, ANY CLAIMS ARISING OUT OF OR RELATING TO: (i) ANY ASPECT OF THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN US; (ii) THIS AGREEMENT; OR (iii) YOUR USE OF STEAM, YOUR ACCOUNT OR THE CONTENT AND SERVICES. IT APPLIES REGARDLESS OF WHETHER SUCH CLAIMS ARE BASED IN CONTRACT, TORT, STATUTE, FRAUD, UNFAIR COMPETITION, MISREPRESENTATION OR ANY OTHER LEGAL THEORY.
I'm curious what as to their legal theory against Valve.
We've all agreed to binding arbitration via the Valve/Steam TOS
Digital Homicide said:The lawsuit recently filed is solely in regards to individuals where no resolution was able to be obtained from Steam to provide a safe environment for us to conduct business. By removing us for defending ourselves against harassment Steam is openly stating you cannot defend yourself...
If there were death threats, then that is an issue. As far as comments or reviews saying a game is terrible and don't buy it, they cannot sue for that. It would be like Columbia Pictures trying to sue critics for their reviews of Ghostbusters saying they did not make the money they should have because reviews hurt ticket sales. Not gonna happen do to the first amendment.
I'm curious what as to their legal theory against Valve.
We've all agreed to binding arbitration via the Valve/Steam TOS
Terms of service agreements aren't exactly legally binding.
The question is, are these genuine death threats, or people talking shit or expressing anger in an over the top way?
I thought you said Valve wins.When Valve win will they end up with DH's IP?
Wait, aren't the steam game forums self-moderated? Couldn't Digital Homicides, as devs, ban these people from ever posting in their forums?
If they could have just banned them and reported them to the police, isn't leaving it up and purusuing a civil suit kind of shitty?