Jim Sterling in court.
- Thread starter Hades
- Start date
Recommended Videos
If I remember correctly in a discussion of the court case someone said that in an earlier Jimquisition, probably one around or after the "interview", it was mentioned they had a cousin who had some knowledge of law.Fsyco said:
I think the person might not be a lawyer but have enough exposure to help with getting the documents in a presentable format and that there is something in there which needs to be.
Most of what I know about the lawsuit is from other sites, and the commentary under the Jimquisition where he first mentioned not talking about the "thing" we expected him to.
EDIT: added content
So, I'm not sure if anyone else is still checking this thread, but there's some interesting developments according to pacermonitor. DigiHom has filed an amended complaint against Jim that's, and I shit thee not, SEVENTY-SEVEN PAGES. 77! I really hope someone 'leaks' it so that we (or at least, I) can comb through it. I imagine the judge isn't wildly thrilled about this.
Incidentally, does anyone with more legal knowledge than I know how long a typical, professional-looking complaint is?
Incidentally, does anyone with more legal knowledge than I know how long a typical, professional-looking complaint is?
I'm still here. In the neogaf forum I saw a few legal minded (not sure what level they were) people talking about what had shown up in the docs. I'm sure they will pick it over.Fsyco said:
Thread title is Jim Sterling is being sued by Digital Homicide.
EDIT: corrected some info.
Still here myself.
77 pages. I think it will have a lot "salsa" to cover this simple matter...
But I guess DigiHom need to adress A LOT of things to have a case. I really need to see if inside this document explain the money lost they claim.
If I see the file somewhere, I will give it a read and I will say my opinion.
Peace!
77 pages. I think it will have a lot "salsa" to cover this simple matter...
But I guess DigiHom need to adress A LOT of things to have a case. I really need to see if inside this document explain the money lost they claim.
If I see the file somewhere, I will give it a read and I will say my opinion.
Peace!
Why not? I mean, they're already wasting everyone's time with this legal case. Might as well take it as far as they can go.Fsyco said:
Then again, I'm pretty sure even they have nagging doubts. That 77 pages is probably as much an attempt to convince themselves that they were wronged as it is to convince others. It's at least a more comforting thought than to think they actually are just as crazy as we all think they are.
I did see the NeoGAF thread, although it seems to have slowed down considerably recently. That's where I initially got the documents from, since some people there had accounts with the company that lets you access those documents.minkus_draconus said:
SweetShark said:
MysticSlayer said:
DigiHom might have fixed their math, so that there's no $800k discrepancy anymore (or hell, added even MORE money). I have no clue what the fuck else they've added in there, though. The original 19 pages was already overbloated; this is almost 4 times that. It's basically a punchline. It's the legal equivalent of one of those shitty simulator games, or a 10 hour video on YouTube that's just one song on repeat.
Maybe they expanded their sections on Jim's alleged encouragement of Harassment? Maybe they just found even more things they don't like? Attacked some of his other articles? Maybe they just went "Fuck it" and decided to bring his YouTube channel into this, despite saying last time that they wouldn't. Fits the pattern of escalation.
The 800K discrepancy vanishes if you add in the money for time of them figuring out legal stuff as I remember from the initial discussion.Fsyco said:
I bet the 77 pages are mostly insane ramblings and long pointless off topic stories.
Actually, the best bet we have to understand what kind of standard things must have this kind of document, is to find a similar case as an example.Fsyco said:
Is there a way to see a similar document like this case?
I just made a search and I found this kind of document as an example. A 38 pages claim mind you.
But here is an interesting bit: You can literally explain your claim with many many many many details.
For example, it seems in the document I have, you can write down every single action of the Jim could cause damage to DigiHom, categories even days if you want.
Well, lets say DigiHom wrote down with many details EVERY SINGLE ATTEMPT Jim wanted to "hurt them" with each video he uploaded and some extra pages posting the WHOLE article Jim posted with the main false claim made Jim for the stolen picture AND explain with MANY MANY details how the picture they own is indeed legit with the help of the picture's owner, showing the deposit for the payment and maybe show the typical copyright payment. Finally DigiHom can write down with MANY SICK details the many attempts of hardcore fans of Jim who wanted to harass mentally the people who work for DigiHom and their families....
So, all these can fill 77 pages?
But here is an interesting bit: You can literally explain your claim with many many many many details.
For example, it seems in the document I have, you can write down every single action of the Jim could cause damage to DigiHom, categories even days if you want.
Well, lets say DigiHom wrote down with many details EVERY SINGLE ATTEMPT Jim wanted to "hurt them" with each video he uploaded and some extra pages posting the WHOLE article Jim posted with the main false claim made Jim for the stolen picture AND explain with MANY MANY details how the picture they own is indeed legit with the help of the picture's owner, showing the deposit for the payment and maybe show the typical copyright payment. Finally DigiHom can write down with MANY SICK details the many attempts of hardcore fans of Jim who wanted to harass mentally the people who work for DigiHom and their families....
So, all these can fill 77 pages?
All I know is if they put the same effort they display in suing Jim to making good games none of this woulda ever happened.
all the time and supposed lost profits they claim from mastering the legal profession, and they don't know better than to just toss an amended application at the clerk without clipping a motion on top... perhaps they shouldda hired a REAL lawyer 
https://www.pacermonitor.com/public/case/10890330/Romine_v_Stanton
"ORDER striking Plaintiff's9 Amended Complaint. Plaintiff may file a Motion to Amend pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 15(a)(2) and Local Rule 15.1(a) by April 27, 2016. Signed by Judge John J Tuchi on 04/15/2016. (ATD)"
https://www.pacermonitor.com/public/case/10890330/Romine_v_Stanton
"ORDER striking Plaintiff's9 Amended Complaint. Plaintiff may file a Motion to Amend pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 15(a)(2) and Local Rule 15.1(a) by April 27, 2016. Signed by Judge John J Tuchi on 04/15/2016. (ATD)"
I remember where the discrepancy came from, I just wasn't sure if they'd somehow fixed it in their amended complaint. They could have either added it in to their total or taken out that part of the damages entirely (since they aren't entitled to compensation for that).minkus_draconus said:
38 pages? All the example ones I've ever seen were like, a page or 2 at most. I suppose it varies from case-to-case, although any evidence of theirs would be in a separate document entirely (which was 33 pages last I checked).SweetShark said:
Jim wouldn't be liable for anything his fans did, although that wouldn't stop DigiHom from trying to blame Jim for it, necessarily.
In the immortal words of Komasan, "MONGE!~". (And they can't afford a real lawyer).eraser7278 said:all the time and supposed lost profits they claim from mastering the legal profession, and they don't know better than to just toss an amended application at the clerk without clipping a motion on top... perhaps they shouldda hired a REAL lawyer
https://www.pacermonitor.com/public/case/10890330/Romine_v_Stanton
"ORDER striking Plaintiff's9 Amended Complaint. Plaintiff may file a Motion to Amend pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 15(a)(2) and Local Rule 15.1(a) by April 27, 2016. Signed by Judge John J Tuchi on 04/15/2016. (ATD)"
So if I'm reading this correctly, the judge struck their amended complaint because they didn't use the correct paperwork?
not quite, the judge struck their amended application because of a procedural issue. if you want the court to make a ruling, you have to ask them to decide on the issue and the way you do that is with a motion.
Also assuming they even did them. Given the immaturity they've displayed, it's possible they may have even made some of them up since the judge would only have their word on it.Fsyco said:
I'll give some leeway given that there are people out there that are that much of a dick, but they could still be 'fudging the numbers'.
Hadn't thought about that, but I certainly wouldn't put it past them. They did say they were going to sue the people harassing them as well as Jim, but the Jim lawsuit is the only one we've seen so far. They might be doing the lawsuits sequentially to minimize the amount of shit they have to deal with at once, though.Reed Spacer said:
You'd think with their alleged 1000 hours of having researched this stuff, they would have known that...eraser7278 said:
I feel like this is the beginning of the end, where DH is going to start seriously slipping up before their case is thrown out of court.
So, it's been a while, but there's been a development: DigiHom has filed the proper motion to have their complaint amended as of yesterday (Wednesday). Pretty sure it won't go through, but you never know.
Also, for some reason, the Romine's GFM page has an update where they explain that they...spent 70 or so dollars on paper and binder clips. Haven't earned any more money, though. And it appears they somehow disabled comments a while ago.
Also, for some reason, the Romine's GFM page has an update where they explain that they...spent 70 or so dollars on paper and binder clips. Haven't earned any more money, though. And it appears they somehow disabled comments a while ago.
Some recent developments, yes.FalloutJack said:
[li]Mar-04: Digital Homicide filed the lawsuit and paid their filing fee. A summons was issue to Jim Sterling, which he received and acknowledged.[/li]
[li]Apr-01: Jim Sterling and his lawyers requested extra time to reply to the complaint. (First Motion).[/li]
[li]Apr-04: Jim and lawyers again requested extra time. (Consent Motion). Not sure why it needed to be requested twice.[/li]
[li]Apr-05: Court granted Jim's Apr-04 request for extra time. (Apr-01 request denied, as it is effectively pointless).[/li]
[li]Apr-13: Digital Homicide filled an updated complaint. 77 pages, mainly photocopies of shutterstock receipts and screenshots of Jim's forums/twitter. It's 77 pages look longer than the original paperwork, but it's the attachments and copies of court paperwork acknowledging those attachments that are padding it out.[/li]
[li]Apr-15: Judge strikes the paperwork submitted on the 13th (for what looks like technical legal reasons.)[/li]
[li]Apr-27: Request by Digital Homicide to amend the complaint paperwork (I assume to re-submit the Apr-13 paperwork).[/li]
[li]May-04: Request by Jim/Jim's Lawyers to dismiss the case. (Under Rule 12(b)(6))[/li]
[li]May-04: A formal reply from Jim/Jim's Lawyers about Digital Homicides Apr-27 request to amend the paperwork.[/li]
The reasoning behind yesterday's request to dismiss the case seems to be on a couple of points. I'm not a US citizen and I sure as hell am not familiar with legal-ese... so pinch of salt time... but my impressions is that Jim's lawyers are saying that even if everything Digital Homicide had submitted were proven to be factually true, that still doesn't constitute libel within the definition used by the court (Failure to State a Claim). Their dismissal request also included "Lack of Standing" and "Lack of Personal Jurisdiction".
Based on a bit of reading last night, it seems that opinion in US libel doesn't matter, especially since bloggers were granted the same legal protections as large media organisations. It only counts if a person saying a provably false statement can be shown to have said it knowing it was false and with the intent of causing harm.
A lot of Digital Homicides argument seems to be that Jim Sterling went after them using the name "ECC Games" and stealing art assets. The art asset thing is easier to prove false, since they had Shutterstock receipts for that art. The ECC Games thing is murkier, since whilst their Steam ID was "ECC Games" and subsequently they changed it to avoid confusion, the icon next to the name always said "Every Click Counts" (I checked on archive.org). They argue that they're entitled to trade under any name they like and that isn't Jim's place to brand them as dishonest or judge "ECC Games" of Poland to be the "real" ECC games. Especially since Jim himself isn't trading under his given legal name.
I haven't seen every piece of evidence. But my memory is that mention of "ECC Games" was in the larger context of Digital Homicide using multiple trading names on Steam, each separate to the other. It got a special mention because the Polish firm contacted him and said they were planning legal action (which they subsequently withdrew, I believe). But Jim only reported their contact and what they told him. It did fit the narrative he was telling though, that DH obfuscating their involvement in so many low quality titles and Valve's infrastructure did nothing to make such obfuscation difficult. Though he did seem to give credence to the polish firm being the "real" ECC games.
The thing is though, I think that's all just Jim's opinion and he has a right to pass on that rather negative opinion if he feels it serves as a warning to his audience.
Was his claim about the art assets provably false. Yes (I think). But nothing in Digital Homicide's paperwork demonstrates that Jim knew it to be false at the time he said it. They only claim he didn't do enough to find out.
Did Jim intend harm to Digital Homicide, in full knowledge of the emotional and financial damage that would cause? I'm really uncomfortable thinking about it, because I suspect Jim was looking for a sacrificial lamb to be the poster child for the point he was making. Digital Homicide put themselves in the cross hairs. But Jim seemed to revel in their being there. But that's his persona and as far as I'm aware, not illegal in any way.
I expect Jim to win this case. I would be much more impressed with him as a human being if he can find a way of playing it down. A simple statement of fact before moving on, would be nice. Failing that a Jimquisition talking about the situation, without mentioning Digital Homicide more than in passing.
Great Mind discuss ideas; average minds discuss events; small minds discuss people.
-Eleanor Roosevelt