Digital Homicide trying to sue Steam users

[BadNewDingus]

Shouldn't it be a crime to clog up the legal system like this?

 

[Neurotic Void Melody]

This was all only a matter of time. But I can only think of this guy upon seeing their demands;

The weird thing is I think I'm actually going to miss them once they sue themselves into obscurity and are essentially gone. This particular shade of crazy is most certainly a morbid entertainment.

 

[RaikuFA]

Shouldn't it be a crime to clog up the legal system like this?

Someone mentioned on here (page 1) that if you keep doing shit like this you can't press any charges without approval from a judge. Some type of cry wolf type law.

 

[Silentpony_v1legacy]

Okay so I went through all like 120+ pages of the suit, and it only lists 12 Users. To be fair, it says "Oh, and we're also suing John/Jane Does 13-100" but they never actually list the other 87, nor their supposed crimes.

 

[Sanji Himura]

Okay so I went through all like 120+ pages of the suit, and it only lists 12 Users. To be fair, it says "Oh, and we're also suing John/Jane Does 13-100" but they never actually list the other 87, nor their supposed crimes.

Actually, they are suing 11 Steam users by username. The other 89 are there as a fishing expedition in case the subpoena to Valve actually goes through. The pattern is not unlike patent troll lawsuits that are common in East Texas.

It should be worth noting that the $18 million that DH is seeking is also for the first 11 defendants. That number will increase for each name that is added to the lawsuit.

 

[Infernal Lawyer]

This goes without saying, but Jim Sterling is having a field day. Do you have any idea how satisfying it is to have the guys who blamed you for all of their problems suddenly tank their entire business by doing the exact same crap that you've called them out on for years, even though you've been effectively forced not to say/do anything about/to them for the last year and a half?

I mean seriously who the hell are the other Steam customers who were actually interested in our products??? That is bs right there given anyone who was gullible to had bought their games would had done so already before the removal!

Bundle buyers adore DH, since you can sell off the cards for more than you bought the games for in the first place. Basically some users said that they didn't care if the games were shit because of the cards, to the point where they would upvote DH's games on Greenlight, and other users (namely the ones in the suit) gave them a mouthful for being "part of the problem".

I hate to be negative but... yeah, pretty much. Removing their games is the absolute bare minimum that Valve could do. Their obligated to protect their customers, and so far they haven't done a good job of that at all. Sure the lawsuit is frivolous, but it doesn't look good on valve when devs are actively suing their user base. Maybe they'll see this as a wake up call.

Besides, if enough people get scared a settle then this could still be lucrative for Digihomicide.

Valve has a history of not really giving a shit about anything until they have a damn good financial/legal reason to. Just look at the CS:GO gambling fiasco: You think they cared that children were being encouraged to gamble by third party sites until they were hit by a lawsuit?

Nah, stories like this will keep happening as long as Valve is able to say "nothing to do with me" while still taking their cut.

 

[Rangaman]

I've read this about three days in a row now. It's still funny.

 

[Gades]

Shouldn't it be a crime to clog up the legal system like this?

Someone mentioned on here (page 1) that if you keep doing shit like this you can't press any charges without approval from a judge. Some type of cry wolf type law.

They could be deemed a Vexatious Litigant, a Litigant who bothers the system or defendant for the purposes of harassment regardless of merits. http://legal-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com/Vexatious+Litigation

 

[Blitsie]

Oh man, gunning for Valve now too is just a bad, bad move. Its essentially like poking Cthulhu awake with a stick and expecting a positive response.

Any of you peeps want popcorn and a raincoat? Its gonna be raining Digital Homicide soon and its gonna be glorious.

 

[RaikuFA]

Shouldn't it be a crime to clog up the legal system like this?

Someone mentioned on here (page 1) that if you keep doing shit like this you can't press any charges without approval from a judge. Some type of cry wolf type law.

They could be deemed a Vexatious Litigant, a Litigant who bothers the system or defendant for the purposes of harassment regardless of merits. http://legal-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com/Vexatious+Litigation

Thank you. I hope they get labelled this soon.

 

[Gades]

New update in DigiHom's Romine v Unknown Party https://www.pacermonitor.com/public/case/19146067/Romine_v_Unknown_Party_et_al

"Order that James Oliver Romine, Jr show cause for failure to comply with LRCiv 3.7(b) before Judge Susan R Bolton. Show Cause Hearing set for 10/17/2016 at 04:30 PM before Judge Susan R Bolton.(MAP)"

If you want to read more about the LRCiv 3.7 (b) is page 13 of these document http://www.azd.uscourts.gov/sites/default/files/local-rules/LRCiv 2012_0.pdf

 

[Drathnoxis]

It should be worth noting that the $18 million that DH is seeking is also for the first 11 defendants. That number will increase for each name that is added to the lawsuit.

I just don't understand why these ridiculous sums always pop up in these cases. Like, there is no freaking way that he could get that amount of money even if he took them for everything they had. These people can't be worth more than a couple hundred thousand a piece, at most.

 

[mardocOz]

I just don't understand why these ridiculous sums always pop up in these cases. Like, there is no freaking way that he could get that amount of money even if he took them for everything they had. These people can't be worth more than a couple hundred thousand a piece, at most.

It's better to aim high and get half way than to ask for $5 and a sandwich.

 

[Drathnoxis]

I just don't understand why these ridiculous sums always pop up in these cases. Like, there is no freaking way that he could get that amount of money even if he took them for everything they had. These people can't be worth more than a couple hundred thousand a piece, at most.

It's better to aim high and get half way than to ask for $5 and a sandwich.

But there's no chance of even getting halfway. He might as well have asked for:
Like, doesn't being so ridiculous hurt his case?

 

[mardocOz]

But there's no chance of even getting halfway. He might as well have asked for:

You're right, but even if he only gets a tenth or a hundredth of the initial claim then the sentiment remains, he's likely to get more by asking for a high amount. Even if he doesn't get it all, he's more likely to get a better sum as a "compromise".

Like, doesn't being so ridiculous hurt his case?

Possibly, I'm no expert in US law. I would actually say that the whole case is pretty ridiculous, and approaching vexatious. But I'm just one lowly voice on the Internet, and I'd better be careful about what I say lest Mr Romine decide that he wants to try and pin me for millions of dollars for having an opinion.

 

[Gades]

Updates_

Romine v Stanton https://www.pacermonitor.com/public/case/10890330/Romine_v_Stanton
MOTION to Amend/Correct1 Complaint by James Oliver Romine, Jr. (KGM)

Romine V Unknown Party https://www.pacermonitor.com/public/case/19146067/Romine_v_Unknown_Party_et_al
REQUEST BY NON-PRISONER PRO SE PARTY FOR ELECTRONIC NOTICING filed by James Oliver Romine, Jr. Pro se parties must promptly notify the Clerks Office, in writing, if there is a change in designated e-mail address or mailing address. (KGM)

MOTION for Extension of Time, MOTION to Dismiss Case by James Oliver Romine, Jr. (3 pages). (KGM)

 

[Fox12]

But there's no chance of even getting halfway. He might as well have asked for:

You're right, but even if he only gets a tenth or a hundredth of the initial claim then the sentiment remains, he's likely to get more by asking for a high amount. Even if he doesn't get it all, he's more likely to get a better sum as a "compromise".

Like, doesn't being so ridiculous hurt his case?

Possibly, I'm no expert in US law. I would actually say that the whole case is pretty ridiculous, and approaching vexatious. But I'm just one lowly voice on the Internet, and I'd better be careful about what I say lest Mr Romine decide that he wants to try and pin me for millions of dollars for having an opinion.

Bear in mind that the Motion Picture Association of America once sued a person for more money then exists on the planet. I'd say the amount itself probably doesn't hurt too much if he's just trying to intimidate people. His stupid suit will probably fall apart though.

 

[TrulyBritish]

But there's no chance of even getting halfway. He might as well have asked for:

You're right, but even if he only gets a tenth or a hundredth of the initial claim then the sentiment remains, he's likely to get more by asking for a high amount. Even if he doesn't get it all, he's more likely to get a better sum as a "compromise".

Like, doesn't being so ridiculous hurt his case?

Possibly, I'm no expert in US law. I would actually say that the whole case is pretty ridiculous, and approaching vexatious. But I'm just one lowly voice on the Internet, and I'd better be careful about what I say lest Mr Romine decide that he wants to try and pin me for millions of dollars for having an opinion.

Bear in mind that the Motion Picture Association of America once sued a person for more money then exists on the planet. I'd say the amount itself probably doesn't hurt too much if he's just trying to intimidate people. His stupid suit will probably fall apart though.

Erm, can I have a citation on that out of interest? I've tried looking it up and the very first article I've seen is by tech dirt titled "No, the RIAA is not seeking $72 trillion dollars from Limewire". Just interested to know if you're referencing something else or this.

 

[Fox12]

But there's no chance of even getting halfway. He might as well have asked for:

You're right, but even if he only gets a tenth or a hundredth of the initial claim then the sentiment remains, he's likely to get more by asking for a high amount. Even if he doesn't get it all, he's more likely to get a better sum as a "compromise".

Like, doesn't being so ridiculous hurt his case?

Possibly, I'm no expert in US law. I would actually say that the whole case is pretty ridiculous, and approaching vexatious. But I'm just one lowly voice on the Internet, and I'd better be careful about what I say lest Mr Romine decide that he wants to try and pin me for millions of dollars for having an opinion.

Bear in mind that the Motion Picture Association of America once sued a person for more money then exists on the planet. I'd say the amount itself probably doesn't hurt too much if he's just trying to intimidate people. His stupid suit will probably fall apart though.

Erm, can I have a citation on that out of interest? I've tried looking it up and the very first article I've seen is by tech dirt titled "No, the RIAA is not seeking $72 trillion dollars from Limewire". Just interested to know if you're referencing something else or this.

Nah, the article Sums it up pretty good. The compan was trying to sue for a certain amount per download, and someone got that estimation based on the number of downloads on lime wire. Perhaps they got the math wrong. Now, whether the money they wanted was more money then currently exists, or just more money then the music industry has evidently made in its entire history, according to the article, it's still an exorbitant amount that reveals their greed. But it's the RIAA and MPAA. Everything they do is extreme.

 

[bastardofmelbourne]

Bear in mind that the Motion Picture Association of America once sued a person for more money then exists on the planet. I'd say the amount itself probably doesn't hurt too much if he's just trying to intimidate people. His stupid suit will probably fall apart though.

Erm, can I have a citation on that out of interest? I've tried looking it up and the very first article I've seen is by tech dirt titled "No, the RIAA is not seeking $72 trillion dollars from Limewire". Just interested to know if you're referencing something else or this.

What happened was the RIAA tried to sue someone for an exorbitant amount (in the tens of thousands of dollars) for each song they had pirated, as each song was an individual act of copyright infringement that technically incurred its own damages. They were only suing them for a few dozen songs, but it still added up to millions of dollars - much more money than the defendant could ever hope to pay.

Then some tech news sites took that per-song damage amount and applied it to every song available on Limewire (or whatever filesharing site was in discussion), which is where the $72 trillion comes from. It was meant to point out how stupid it was to calculate "lost revenue" by slapping a five-digit value onto each song, because if each song was really worth that much, the music industry would be making more money than exists on the planet. The RIAA was basically asking for imaginary profits from the sale of non-existent CDs.

The whole thing was ridiculous, and the RIAA knew it was ridiculous, and they were only doing it because their policy at the time was to sue a few high-profile copyright infringers for such colossal sums of money that it would intimidate future music pirates. As far as I know that's still their policy, but it's been toned down due to negative publicity and because it was doing absolutely nothing to stop internet piracy.