Slashdot Mirror
Infinium Labs Threatens Gaming News Site
Over the past year or two, Slashdot has run a number of stories about Infinium Labs and their Phantom Game Console (that phrase still makes me smile, every time). I think we've been generous to them, taking their game console talk at more or less face value, despite the vaporous nature of the product. Now they've decided that threats are a better plan for improving their image than producing a real product, and threatened HardOCP over an older news story. Our own Robin Miller has talked to Infinium and written up his impressions of the situation.
I have extended HardOCP.com's pledge to correct any and all possible inconsistencies or errors in our editorial entitled "Behind the Phantom Console" personally to Timothy Roberts and Kevin Bachus of Infinium Labs and they have yet to inform HardOCP.com of any information we presented as being not correct. This courtesy was extended on September 17, 2003, the date the article was published and has been extended several times since then with no reply ever being received by HardOCP.com. It is my opinion that Infinium Labs' only interest is stifling HardOCP.com and our opinions. HardOCP.com still stands by our thoughts and opinions put forth in our editorial and no amount of legal badgering and frivolous lawsuits will change those opinions that we have shared with our readers.
_____________________________
Kyle Bennett
Editor-in-Chief @ HardOCP.com
Nice to see they have no intention of rolling over.
Anyways, anybody who is trying to sell stuff to the geek community needs to realize that most geeks just get pissed off by these companies bitching about stuff like this. Making threats(bullying) and trying to censor people(notice the .sig) annoys me.
Trust Your Technolust
Let's see - this person is claiming to be Lyssa Watson but the domain the account links to is registered to Lisa Sabin. Furthermore, no Lyssa Watson has ever been employed at Infinium. Check the history of this account for further proof that this is thinly veiled disinformation in an attempt to gain karma [from moron mods] to further troll activities.
He's got his own console type thing (it seems to be directed at developers, since it's of the "make it yourself" breed not seen in the last 20 years). Try the official site XGameStation
I call shenanigans on this post, namely because:
1) "Macroscale Design" is n't a degree I've heard of, if anything for designing products you'd have a product design degree.
2) You don't do product design in rendering packages like maya and lightwave, more like Solidworks or if you did n't have the cash Rhino3D.
mofo's been featured on slashdot before: http://slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=02/03/15/195620 0
mofo seems to be a contraction of Morrison & Foerster LLP.
It is publicly traded. See here!
Just what made you think they weren't?
IANAL, but I believe you have misinterpreted the article you cite. Those people were fired, not something that requires due process in a court of law.
Both slander and libel require due process in a court of law, and are statutory, not constitutional, meaning that congress has enacted a law. The 1st amendment starts with "congress shall enact no law". If you and I have a business relationship (employment), you are free to cancel it for what I might say or write. If you want to force me to take back my words, you're going to have to take me to court where we'll we get into that constitutional laws trump statutory laws thing.
Infinium Labs would go to court to prove that HardOCP's article was libelous, and therefor not protected speech. One of two outcomes would occur:
A. The court agrees with Infinium Labs, ruling that the article is not, in fact, protected speech. HardOCP is punished and this case is not a First Amendment issue.
B. The court agrees with HardOCP, ruling that the article is protected speech. Infinium Labs' case is thrown out, and this case is not a First Amendment issue.
So either way, this is not a First Amendment issue. Try again.
"Ask not what your country can do for you." --John F. Kennedy
...by a journalist. It's the doctrine of "actual malice" enunciated by the court in the case "New York Times vs. Sullivan". Essentially, the journalist has to have actually lied or acted with a deliberate disregard for the truth in publishing the defamatory story. Unless Roberts can successfully argue that HardOCP isn't a media outlet protected under Sullivan, I doubt that he will prevail in a libel lawsuit.
144l. ph34r my 133t l3g4l 5k1lz!
Links to the company's SEC filings are here. Pretty illuminating.
The project is a goner long ago. Getting the article removed is simply an attempt to cover his tracks before he launches another scheme to vacuum up investor money. He doesn't want some future journalist to dig this up when he's doing a new song-and-dance for the monied crowd.
======= ~\_/~\_O Burmese