Slashdot Mirror


HardOCP Sues Infinium Over Legal Threats

Cebu writes "According to GameSpot, in a less than surprising move, Kyle Bennett of tech website HardOCP has decided to file a lawsuit against Infinium Labs, makers of the forthcoming Phantom PC-based 'console'. On February 27, a lawsuit was filed in the United States District Court for the Northern District of Texas, Dallas Division under the Declaratory Judgment Act to force the issue of Infinium Labs' repeated legal threats against HardOCP for an allegedly defamatory article written last year."

326 comments

  1. Lawyer Central? by IamGarageGuy+2 · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Has /. become a place where the geeks talk law?

    --
    Stay tuned for new sig...
    1. Re:Lawyer Central? by gatesh8r · · Score: 5, Funny

      Slashdot has now become... Grokdot! (er... well we could make it Slashlaw, but...)

      --
      Karma whorin' since 1999
    2. Re:Lawyer Central? by Night+Goat · · Score: 0, Flamebait

      Yeah, no kidding. I think I'm going to go and change my preferences so they don't show all this law stuff. A bit is interesting, but when you have simoniker posting three law articles in a row, fuck it, I don't need that. If I cared that much about law, I'd be a lawyer.

    3. Re:Lawyer Central? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting

      >> Slashdot has now become... Grokdot! (er... well we could make it Slashlaw, but...)

      SlashGrok would be better. I'm not sure what symbols you would use to represent it, though, both /? and /! don't look quite right.

    4. Re:Lawyer Central? by PacoTaco · · Score: 1

      I think it's slow news day stuff. Some company is always suing some other company, so it's not hard to fill the gaps with lawsuit news. Personally I find these stories the least interesting part of Slashdot.

    5. Re:Lawyer Central? by TheSpoom · · Score: 5, Insightful

      This isn't about law, it's about RIGHTS. I think most of us don't care (too much) about the particulars of the lawsuit but DO care that Infinium Labs is trying to silence HardOCP.com for posting a well-researched article that happens to go against what Infinium wants people to think about them.

      I think the point is that the truth is more important than an company's PR issues.

      --
      It's better to vote for what you want and not get it than to vote for what you don't want and get it.
      - E. Debs
    6. Re:Lawyer Central? by QEDog · · Score: 0, Offtopic

      don't forget Ask Slasdot, where most post start with "IANAL"

      --
      "There is no teacher but the enemy."-Mazer Rackham
    7. Re:Lawyer Central? by slycer · · Score: 2, Insightful

      There's always been articles like this, and, imo, always *should*..

      However, they *should* fall under the YRO category and not gaming.. this has a weak weak link to gaming in any regards (I mean, who REALLY believes that Infinium is coming out??).

    8. Re:Lawyer Central? by LostCluster · · Score: 0, Interesting

      Well-researched? HardOCP admitted that there were a few mistakes in their first article.

    9. Re:Lawyer Central? by criordan · · Score: 0

      Before I figured out that IANAL stood for "I Am Not A Layer", the whole "I anal" thing at the start of all those posts had me very confused.

      --
      http://www.aaplblog.com/ - News about Apple Inc.
    10. Re:Lawyer Central? by August_zero · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Couldn't have said it better myself really.

      Though infinium is a joke, the practice of using legal threats to silence bad press is something that is becoming more and more popular. I for one am glad that someone is playing hardball with them.

      I really look forward to watching Infinium go down the toilet, I think when the dirt surfaces its going to be some funny stuff, like Enron, only instead of a gigantic corporation it will be happening to a make-believe company run by elves and faeries. I can already see them circling the drain...

      --
      On Wall Street they say "buy low, sell high" On the pad we say, "buy high, sell high" Isn't that somehow better?
    11. Re:Lawyer Central? by krusadr · · Score: 5, Funny

      Oh come on, this is SPORTS for geeks.

      --
      while sco {
      wget -O /dev/null http://www.sco.com?sco=litigious%20bastards
      }
    12. Re:Lawyer Central? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      RTFA, the original one that is, and then read the errors that they admit they made. All of them could be traced back to materials that Infinium released themselves.

      Please, if you are going to try and troll, pursue it with some skill. You discredit the Troll community when you just randomly blather about errors that you didn't bother to research yourself.

    13. Re:Lawyer Central? by 00420 · · Score: 5, Informative

      HardOCP admitted that there were a few mistakes in their first article.

      ROTFL

      Did you even read the page you linked to? If not, here's a sample:

      8. In reference to BIG, we will gladly remove the statement, "According to this article, they lived the high life on investors' money and then left investors hanging for more than $15 million dollars:" that is being brought to our attention.

      The sentence has been changed to quote more accurately, "According to this article, "Broadband executives lived the high life, sponsoring race cars in the Indy 500 and other races, hosting Hollywood parties, buying an interest in an airplane and making thousands of dollars worth of improvements to a $35 million headquarters. But last November (2000), the tech venture went bust. By then it had burned through more than $15 million of investors' money, including some from several St. Louis Cardinals owners. Roberts could not be reached for comment."

    14. Re:Lawyer Central? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Please tell me your reply was sarcasm, because the link you provided is mostly a joke making fun of IF. The "mistakes" corrected were mostly because HardOCP didn't have hard evidence of what had been said (ie, a tape recording), not because they made mistakes.

      #5, #9 and #11 are all things that HardOCP had "wrong" because they were LIED to or mis-lead by IF or by Roberts.

      #8 was changed because HardOCP chose to quote verbatum what Roberts had said, because it made him look like more of theif. And I personally found it fucking hillarious that they "cleaned up" this point.

      Oh, wait. This is /. No one reads the stories or the articles, or thier own links before reacting.

    15. Re:Lawyer Central? by Trejkaz · · Score: 1

      Slashlaw would make more sense, anyway...

      --
      Karma: It's all a bunch of tree-huggin' hippy crap!
    16. Re:Lawyer Central? by black+mariah · · Score: 1, Funny

      I dunno. As reader of Something Awful and peruser of many of their Awful Links of the Day, anytime I hear the term 'slash' I immediately think of gay sex fanfic. Slashlaw just brings to mind images of those guys from the Practice getting it on, and that's just not a pretty picture.

      --
      'Standards' in computing only impress those who are impressed by things like 'standards'.
    17. Re:Lawyer Central? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What are you talking about? Did you read the "corrections"? Basically, they checked their facts. The problem appears to be that Infinium and it's corporate leaders isn't always a reliable source.

      Mod down the parent. A lot.

    18. Re:Lawyer Central? by Rew190 · · Score: 1

      I don't think anyone cares about the details of the lawsuit itself, it's just an interesting, geek-related topic. You don't have to be interested in law to want to follow stuff like this - read: MS anti-trust.

    19. Re:Lawyer Central? by Trejkaz · · Score: 0

      So why doesn't Slashdot invoke the same sort of images? :-)

      --
      Karma: It's all a bunch of tree-huggin' hippy crap!
    20. Re:Lawyer Central? by Bewray · · Score: 1

      I think they should make a legal.slashdot.org, just like apple.slashdot.org and games and so on.

      That way, if I'm into lawsuits and I like SCO's style, I can go there.

      --
      My spoon is too big!
    21. Re:Lawyer Central? by PurpleFloyd · · Score: 2, Funny
      What exactly does a dot conjure up in your mind that it is sexual?

      Oh, Pac-Man! We must not! We can not! It is not permitted!

      --

      That's it. I'm no longer part of Team Sanity.
    22. Re:Lawyer Central? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Only the ignorant neglect to learn about the laws of the society they live in. I don't have a problem with you being ignorant, just leave it to yourself.

    23. Re:Lawyer Central? by fsterman · · Score: 0, Offtopic

      Bush threatened the press that if they did a story about an exspose book on his cocaine habits. These kinds of threats affect everything. Geeks should be very watchful of these things.

      --
      Is there anything better than clicking through Microsoft ads on Slashdot?
    24. Re:Lawyer Central? by Trejkaz · · Score: 1

      What does law conjure up that is sexual?

      --
      Karma: It's all a bunch of tree-huggin' hippy crap!
    25. Re:Lawyer Central? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Not suprising when the subject websites flash the logos for their law firms (Morrison & Foerster and Nixon Peabody) in the same slideshow as AMD and NVidia.
      Processors.. Video... Protection against droves of angry investors...

      Maybe if they just release Phantasm, they'd discredit HardOCP and not need to sue. And come on guys... it could be a solid system, especially considering they have a whole month for beta testing.

    26. Re:Lawyer Central? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

      well, it is a period after all...
      badump-ching!

    27. Re:Lawyer Central? by siliconbunny · · Score: 1

      Certainly not Ally McBeal, at least...

    28. Re:Lawyer Central? by paradesign · · Score: 5, Funny
      Id appreciate you not degrading the race of elves like this. You can expect to hear from our lawyers.

      Respectfully,
      Legolas.

      --
      I want 2D games back.
    29. Re:Lawyer Central? by orthogonal · · Score: 5, Funny
      Before I figured out that IANAL stood for "I Am Not A Layer", the whole "I anal" thing at the start of all those posts had me very confused.

      You write "confused", but perceptive readers know you mean "intrigued" or "curious".

      :)

    30. Re:Lawyer Central? by orthogonal · · Score: 1

      However, [articles like these] *should* fall under the YRO category and not gaming.

      This isn't technically about rights: Infinium would have a point, if they'd really been libeled; but since it seems pretty clear from HardOCP's response that any claim of libel is laughable, it seems to me to be a case of barratry on Infinium's part.

      Slashdot needs a couple of new categories: "Dubious Business Practices" and "Abuses of the Legal System". And let's admit it, we may be geeks, we may be nerds, but such stories matter to us as much -- if not more -- than the release of a new console game, OSS product, or RFC.

    31. Re:Lawyer Central? by pyrrhonist · · Score: 5, Funny
      What does law conjure up that is sexual?

      Ask and you shall receive...

      Top Ten Things That Sound Dirty In Law But Aren't:

      10. Have you looked through her briefs?
      9. He is one hard judge!
      8. Counselor, let's do it in chambers.
      7. His attorney withdrew at the last minute.
      6. Is it a penal offense?
      5. Better leave the handcuffs on.
      4. For $200 an hour, she better be good!
      3. Can you get him to drop his suit?
      2. The judge gave her the stiffest one he could.

      And the number 1 thing that sounds dirty in law but isn't:

      1. Think you can get me off?

      --
      Show me on the doll where his noodly appendage touched you.
    32. Re:Lawyer Central? by bugbread · · Score: 1, Insightful

      Agreed, in principle, but in this case, the issue appeals much more to people who are interested in gaming than to people who are interested in YRO.

    33. Re:Lawyer Central? by black+mariah · · Score: 1

      Grandfather clause. I read Slashdot before I read SA so it came before my knowledge of gay sex fan fiction.

      Something Awful needs to be bitchslapped for ruining my fragil little mind.

      --
      'Standards' in computing only impress those who are impressed by things like 'standards'.
    34. Re:Lawyer Central? by DougWhite · · Score: 1

      This actually makes sense. I mean after your economy hits a wall going 100, you need to hire lawyers to figure out who is to blame. When the economy picks up again the lawyers will go back to contract negotiations, and tax evasion. Stuff that isn't really interesting.

      Actually what I think it is, is that the internet bubble created a lot of things, so the judicial system is now trying to sort out what is what and which laws apply to them. This has an effect on geeks so to speak

    35. Re:Lawyer Central? by black+mariah · · Score: 1

      It's not the law that conjures up images. It's the slash part. If you read sites like Something Awful or portalofevil.com enough, you'll eventually run across something called 'slash' which is gay sex fan fiction. Slashlaw ends up sounding like slash for lawyer shows. *SHUDDER*

      --
      'Standards' in computing only impress those who are impressed by things like 'standards'.
    36. Re:Lawyer Central? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I ANAL, a new robot book from the people that rape the IP of dead authors. Issac Assimov, fer instance.

      Kinda a nifty possiblity. I could use a robot with OCD around my sty.

    37. Re:Lawyer Central? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Why in hell would anyone want to read the putrid shit-ridden musings masquerading as 'content' at Something Awful anyway?

    38. Re:Lawyer Central? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      and in other law news, SCO have sued DaimlerChrysler

    39. Re:Lawyer Central? by black+mariah · · Score: 1

      Because unlike Slashdot, they know their website is full of putrid shit-ridden musings masquerading as 'content', and tend to point it out on a constant basis.

      --
      'Standards' in computing only impress those who are impressed by things like 'standards'.
    40. Re:Lawyer Central? by Winkhorst · · Score: 1

      As a well researched troll, I resent that. Well, as well as I can research from under this bridge...

      Seriously, though, I have to wonder if the lawyerly firm representing Infinium warned them that their activity might lead to counteraction by HardOCP. But then, that just increases their profit margin, so I guess it doesn't bother the lawyers much.

      As for too much law on Slashdot, one would think that geeks would be interested in "legal" attempts to silence a game geek website.

      --
      "Is this Winkhorst a nova criminal?" "No just a technical sergeant wanted for interrogation."
    41. Re:Lawyer Central? by curtisk · · Score: 1

      You sir, have been moderated most unfairly. As a fellow SA and POE reader(though they have not been too good in a while, its kinda dropped off) your observation on the term "slash" in internet vernacular is legit and funny, not flamebait

      --

      Sehr geehrter Toilettenbenutzer!

    42. Re:Lawyer Central? by Hagakure · · Score: 1
      --


      If this is Heaven I'm bailin out! I cant tolerate this ol tin-tub, so fulla trash and rats...
    43. Re:Lawyer Central? by operagost · · Score: 1
      Bush threatened the press that if they did a story about an exspose [sic] book on his cocaine habits.
      ... then what? Where's the rest of your sentence? Oh well, I guess it's academic anyway since you made that up. Everyone knows Bush was into drinking and drugs at one time. He discarded that when he was born again. He isn't afraid to admit that he did wrong things, unlike his predecessor.

      "I didn't inhale"

      "I don't think blowjobs are sex"

      --

      Gamingmuseum.com: Give your 3D accelerator a rest.
    44. Re:Lawyer Central? by tyler_42 · · Score: 1

      /. is the place where geeks talk about whatever the hell they want to talk about. As for HardOCP, I'm really starting to like those guys.

    45. Re:Lawyer Central? by Wakko+Warner · · Score: 1

      [Bush] isn't afraid to admit that he did wrong things, unlike his predecessor.

      Then why won't he admit he lied about WMDs in order to invade and topple the government of Iraq?

      - A.P.

      --
      "Remember when the U.S. had a drug problem, and then we declared a War On Drugs, and now you can't buy drugs anymore?"
    46. Re:Lawyer Central? by Trejkaz · · Score: 1

      So once again, what is acceptable about Slashdot? It has the same "Slash" part! Jesus, it's like a whole segment of the population can't read.

      --
      Karma: It's all a bunch of tree-huggin' hippy crap!
    47. Re:Lawyer Central? by black+mariah · · Score: 1

      To quote from another part of the same discussion where I answered this question, because you're apparently in the segment of the population that can't read:

      "Grandfather clause. I read Slashdot before I read SA so it came before my knowledge of gay sex fan fiction. Something Awful needs to be bitchslapped for ruining my fragil little mind."

      --
      'Standards' in computing only impress those who are impressed by things like 'standards'.
    48. Re:Lawyer Central? by Trejkaz · · Score: 1

      You posted that response after the other one, but that's okay since you appear to be in the segment of the population who don't understand time...

      And anyway it's a pretty piss-poor excuse if you ask me. What about the other Slashdot branded stuff... Slashcode? Is that dirty?

      --
      Karma: It's all a bunch of tree-huggin' hippy crap!
    49. Re:Lawyer Central? by black+mariah · · Score: 1

      Dude, fuck off. You're demanding logical explanations for something that was a fucking joke to begin with. Seriously, I implore you, get a life.

      --
      'Standards' in computing only impress those who are impressed by things like 'standards'.
    50. Re:Lawyer Central? by Trejkaz · · Score: 1

      Whatever. I didn't see you stopping the conversation either, fuckwad.

      --
      Karma: It's all a bunch of tree-huggin' hippy crap!
  2. Here's my view on all this: by Dr+Reducto · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Last night, I posted, and got flamed to a crisp for supporting Infinium Labs. People were posting my "Home Address" by looking at a review from 2000 and looking in the area for the name in my email address (BTW, way to go on noticing the date. You got the area of Maryland a little bit off because of that.). I know Infinium is a laughing stock among the Slashdot crowd, but here is what I have to say.

    I think this has gone a little bit too far. HardOCP posted an article that was quite misleading. I don't think they they maliciously *lied*, but definitely misled it's readers. I personnally don't feel it warrants a Libel case, however, it goes without saying: I am not a lawyer! Infinium sent the letter saying that it didn't like the article and was going to sue, and then HardOCp decided to escalate by countersueing. I bet that HardOCP could have let the "lawsuit" slide and an out of court settlement would have happened, if anything. Now there WILL be a messy legal battle.

    Additionally, I don't see how hard it is to believe in the Phantom's existence. It's just a small form factor PC tied to a VPN which is the only way to purchase games. Yes, it has VERY powerful DRM, and is Microsoft's TCPA wet-dream. If the back-end didn't come together, Infinium could still make a killing selling complete systems that compete in price with the Shuttle barebones kits. It's standard PC hardware, with a few custom add-ons to integrate the hardware&softwaresides of the DRM scheme.

    [Disclaimer: Views expressed are my own and not necessarily representative of those of Infinium Labs]

    1. Re:Here's my view on all this: by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

      HardOCP posted an article that was quite misleading. I don't think they they maliciously *lied*, but definitely misled it's readers.

      On what points exactly do you feel that HardOCP misled their readers?

      Infinium sent the letter saying that it didn't like the article and was going to sue, and then HardOCp decided to escalate by countersueing.

      They didn't escalate, they just called Infinium's bluff. If I'm reading the news right, the legal action here concerns solely the matters that Infinium's original threats of legal action were based on. There is no escalation here at all, they've just moved the venue of discussion.

      It's standard PC hardware, with a few custom add-ons to integrate the hardware&softwaresides of the DRM scheme.

      I believe when people say the infinium doesn't exist they mean that the custom add-ons don't exist or do not have substance. I don't think anyone believes that Infinium doesn't have PC hardware.

      However I also think most people who've looked closely at what Infinium is saying believe that in the screenshot Infinium distributed where there's the kid playing Quake 3 on a TV with a phantom sitting in front of it, that you're looking at any sort of actual product Infinium has or will have.

    2. Re:Here's my view on all this: by LostCluster · · Score: 4, Insightful

      I agree that neither side is coming into the dispute with clean hands here. HardOCP's first edition of the article was not perfect, even they admited that there were several points that needed to be retracted. However, HardOCP handled their mistakes gracefully by retracting what they were proven wrong on.

      Infinium thought they had weak prey, so they overreached and added a few threats that they wouldn't be able to follow through on either. They might have even been hoping that they could scare HardOCP into shutting down completely.

      It's hard to run a news organization of any kind without at least having a laywer within reach. Whenever you say bad things about businesses, you'll eventually run into somebody who thinks thye have more lawyers than you can ever afford...

    3. Re:Here's my view on all this: by MBCook · · Score: 4, Insightful
      I disagree. I think that at the time HardOCP did a great job. And for quite a while many here on /. (and elsewhere) have thought that the phantom was just... aptly named.

      That said, while I am still quite scepticle of the whole thing, I have to admit I no longer think the console is just vaporware. Between the press demo they did a few months ago for a few select members of the press (which at least had photos of the thing), to fact that they will have an 8,000 square foot booth at E3 I think this might not be vaporware. It could still fail miserably and be nothing like they've promised, but at least they seem to be doing more than saying "we have a great console, we'll prove it later" like they did for so long.

      The proof is in the pudding. Nintendo's DS, the Phantom, and more are going to be shown at E3. It should be very intersting.

      And let's face it. Suing someone priting facts about you that don't look good more than a year after they were posted (and when you still haven't shown any real proof to anyone yet) just doesn't look good for your company.

      --
      Comment forecast: Bits of genius surrounded by a sea of mediocrity.
    4. Re:Here's my view on all this: by screwballicus · · Score: 4, Insightful

      I bet that HardOCP could have let the "lawsuit" slide and an out of court settlement would have happened, if anything. Now there WILL be a messy legal battle.

      Well of course they could have settled on this attrocious claim. And that might perhaps be judged the reasonable thing to do, if concessions to outrageous litigiousness simply because it's litigious are to be the expectation of private bodies in our society. But as of now, many of us still value due process of law over concession to threat. And so be it, that due process of law take its course here.

    5. Re:Here's my view on all this: by Aerion · · Score: 3, Insightful

      I bet that HardOCP could have let the "lawsuit" slide and an out of court settlement would have happened, if anything.

      But that would be taking "the easy and cheap way out of this situation," as Kyle Bennett said, and would be "throwing away [HardOCP.com's] credibility." The point of the countersuit is that HardOCP doesn't want to let this thing slide. That should have been pretty obvious when they posted the threatening letters from Infinium on their site.

    6. Re:Here's my view on all this: by ValourX · · Score: 3, Insightful

      I hope you'll pardon me for saying so, but if you felt "misled" after reading that article then you may have a reading comprehension problem. Whether you do or not, failing to recognize that it is fundamentally wrong for a corporation or individual to attempt to silence a free voice on the Internet is the reason why you got flamed so hard.

      The vocal majority is that way for a good reason. If you find that you have differing or opposing opinions, you should ask yourself why. If you truly feel you're correct in your assent, then you'll have to be eloquent and state your opinion clearly and offer a reasonable and detailed explanation why you're on the other side. If you can't do that, you will face the wrath of the vocal majority.

      It is never right for someone to threaten a media outlet because they don't like what a writer has to say. HardOCP was 100% correct in refusing to remove the letter and 100% correct in offering to fix any factual errors. There being none, there should be no cause for dispute.

      As for your home address... if someone on the Internet really wants to find where you live, they can. Over one million people in the Rochester metro area can find my address and phone number from the phone book that is issued to everyone who has a land line. No one's up in arms about that, are they? You can get lots of people's names, addresses and phone numbers just by searching publicly available tools or by looking up the owner of a domain.

      Personally, I'm glad you got flamed; you deserve it if you spoke out against HardOCP in this issue. As an Internet journalist and writer I think it's of extreme importance that everyone recognize that HardOCP is in the right in this matter according to the facts as they have been presented, and that Infinium Labs was appallingly wrong for doing what they did.

      -Jem
    7. Re:Here's my view on all this: by Disevidence · · Score: 3, Insightful

      I wisely see you have removed your sig.

      Oh wait, you haven't, despite the admission you haven't played anything on a phantom.

      Waspish comments aside, HardOCP do have the perfect right to sue them, and saying "I think this has gone a little bit too far" is rather counter-productive. HardOCP is forcing the issue here and now, to stop what could possibly be endless months of legal threats, with no action. No-one likes legal threats, and the HardOCP team have moved to clear this up.

      The blame lies solely on Infinium Labs. They could of just politely asked HardOCP to correct a few errors in the article (which OCP did), but they then proceeded to wax lyrically about legal threats, which was unneeded. Of course, they could of done alot better by ignoring the article, and getting on with making the phantom, or providing some proof to the contrary, but instead they threatened to sue.

      To me, that doesn't sound like a secure company.

      Hint: To stop flammatory comments, much like my opening lines, change your .sig to "Assigned Beta Tester". HTH.

      "Additionally, I don't see how hard it is to believe in the Phantom's existence"

      I'd like to have evidence, not faith.

      --
      Think nothing is impossible? Try slamming a revolving door.
    8. Re:Here's my view on all this: by LostCluster · · Score: 4, Interesting

      They didn't escalate, they just called Infinium's bluff. If I'm reading the news right, the legal action here concerns solely the matters that Infinium's original threats of legal action were based on. There is no escalation here at all, they've just moved the venue of discussion.

      To call the bluff would just be responding to the threat of a lawsuit with a challenge to sue. This is a little further, HardOCP filed the lawsuit for them...

    9. Re:Here's my view on all this: by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I think he removed it then put it back.

    10. Re:Here's my view on all this: by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Informative

      HardOCp decided to escalate by countersueing [sic]

      No, what HardOCP did is file a declaratory lawsuit. This is a lawsuit that forces a court to decide a set of facts once and for all. In this case, the facts under dispute are those in HardOCP's article.

      This is NOT an escalation, it's a resolution.

      Btw, I am a law student.

    11. Re:Here's my view on all this: by ChaoticLimbs · · Score: 4, Interesting

      If you ARE a phantom BETA tester I have to ask- Have you received your hardware? Have you played games on the system? What games?

    12. Re:Here's my view on all this: by kamikazichaser · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Hang on, how did HardOCP mislead their readers? I read the article and now have the distinct impression that the phantom gaming console will remain just that: a phantom. It also appears that IL's claims of having many game developers signed up were at least premature if not completely false. It seems to me that this is exactly what someone should get out of the article and has been supported by independent sources. Malicious or not, Steve, the author, didn't lie as far as I can tell. What IL wants Kyle to remove from HardOCP are Steve's opinions and the information he used to form those opinions. I don't think that's going to happen without a court order.

      As for a messy legal battle, perhaps you don't understand what they filed. Kyle filed a "declaratory judgment lawsuit" in order to "clear the air and terminate the flurry of demands, allegations, and defamatory Internet posts directed against HardOCP..." This will bring the situation to a head. Hopefully, it will also be the first step to end this rather silly situation.

      But really, do you feel that IL has been honest and open about the state of their, um, product?

    13. Re:Here's my view on all this: by tessaiga · · Score: 1
      I think this has gone a little bit too far. HardOCP posted an article that was quite misleading. I don't think they they maliciously *lied*, but definitely misled it's readers.
      Could you be more specific about which parts you found deliberately misleading?

      I read through the letter that Infinium sent HardOCP, and a lot of it was "he said-she said" where essentially Infinium seems to be complaining that they weren't given a chance to rebut points made in the article before it went to virtual "press" -- points like the existance or non-existance of facilities, buildings, and demos.

      There were also other issues that I thought was clearly nit-picking. For example, point 3 complains that because Roberts quit as CEO of BIG 6 months before it went bankrupt, he clearly shouldn't be blamed for the bankruptcy. Is Infinium implying that BIG was doing great until Roberts quit, and suddenly collapsed 6 months after he left? If anything, I think that interpretation of the facts is much more misleading than HardOCP's.

      I do think that the HardOCP piece was not favorable towards Infinium, especially in light of more recent coverage that seems to suggest they've actually got working models now. However, as far as I can tell, the HardOCP article was factual in content and it's certainly its perogative to publish a negative piece on hardware that it doesn't like. As long as HardOCP is accurate in its use of research material cited in the case, I think this whole case is less about whether HardOCP likes the Phantom or not, and more about the right of news sites to call things as they see them -- whether you do or don't agree with their opinions. You're free to post a rebuttal if you disagree, but not to sue to shut them up in the first place.

      --
      The bold print giveth, and the fine print taketh away ...
    14. Re:Here's my view on all this: by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Informative
    15. Re:Here's my view on all this: by Bob+Davis,+Retired · · Score: 1

      What is there to support? Would you believe it if I told you that I had a similar product, and then showed you a 3D rendering of it? Because, that's all that Infinium has done. Announced a product, and then posted 3D renderings of it. There was a demo, but the alleged product didn't demo (or even BOOT) at all.

      HardOCP just posted the truth about the console, and provided certain facts that reflect upon the character and believability of the Infinium people. Apparently, they didn't appreciate being equated with shysters, but that's what they seem like. First, they had 15 million in VC. Then they didn't. Next, they had support from most of the leading game companies. Then, they didn't.

      Where's the fucking beef?

    16. Re:Here's my view on all this: by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Im just curious about one thing, since Infinium has no office space or factories, do the developers hold meetings at the local YMCA?

    17. Re:Here's my view on all this: by aliens · · Score: 4, Informative

      I didn't know that advocating a non-litigous solution

      That is not what you are suggesting. You are suggesting that HardOCP give in to the litigation threatened by Infinium.

      A non-litiguous solution would have been, Infinium's CEO (Roberts) sends a letter to HardOCP(Kyle) saying, "You hurt my feelings with your article please take it down" and Kyle could have said yes or no, that is a non-litigious solution.

      If you read the article and Infinium's response, the article did not contain false information, merely information that isn't very flattering for Infinium's CEO.

      What HardOCP are doing is simply bringing this to a head weeks or months before it gets bounced back and forth between the two companies.

      It's like a bandaid, rip it off quickly rather than picking at it.

      --
      -- taking over the world, we are.
    18. Re:Here's my view on all this: by aurum42 · · Score: 2, Insightful
      Are you affiliated with Infinium at all? Even after re-reading your posts, I'm not certain why you are such a vocal defender of this company, which seemed at least initially to be a sham, according to evidence gathered by HardOCP.

      I've read the original HardOCP article, and they seem to have done a thorough job of investigating Infinium, and the evidence is overwhelming that at least at some point of time, the company was just a po box. From their evidence, tt is also quite plausible that the CEO is a dotcom era slash-and-burn artist, who went through VC funding for several companies and never delivered. Do you have any evidence to the contrary? I'm certain all of us would like to hear of it.

      --
      "The slave who knows his master's will and does not get ready...will be be beaten with many blows."Luke 12:47-48
    19. Re:Here's my view on all this: by djrogers · · Score: 4, Informative

      Uhh, the link says that they will be 'setting up shop in' an 8000 sq ft section of a hall, not that the whole 8000 sq ft will be theirs! An 80x100ft booth at ANY trade show would be outrageous for all but the largest of companies... Shoot, does Infinium even have anough employees to man a booth that size?

      --
      Think outside the... Hey, where'd the friggin' box go?
    20. Re:Here's my view on all this: by gaijin99 · · Score: 4, Interesting
      You must remember, free speech does not come "free".
      While true, it ain't right. Our legal system is seriously broken when person foo can say something truthful about megacorp bar and because he doesn't have money for a fancy gang of lawyers he gets taken to the cleaners. That's the way it is, but that doesn't mean that's the way it should be.
      When I say they should have kept things quiet and let things slide, I meant a compromise reached by both sides.
      HardOCP offered compromise early in the game, they received a threat and politely offered to correct any (imaginary as it turns out) factual errors. I have a more hardline view: when any person or corp has a legal threat as their first resort I think that compromise has already gone out the window. The person threatening legal action has already discarded compromise as an option. More to the point that sort of oppressive nastyness should not be met with any toleration at all. Anyone who's thought process goes: "I don't like what this person is saying so I'll get my high power legal team to threaten his entire livelyhood" deserves no sympathy. The only appropriate action is to do whatever is in your power to ruin them because they've already decided to try and ruin you.

      Had Infinitum Labs sent a non-legally threatening letter politely noting factual errors and requesting that they be corrected things would be different. But from what I can tell the thought of trying a non-litigous solution never crossed their minds. So screw 'em.

      --
      "Mission Accomplished" -- George W. Bush May 1, 2003
    21. Re:Here's my view on all this: by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      1) People flamed you to a crisp because you call yourself a Beta Tester of a product that you are neither Testing, nor is it in Beta. All you have is your misguided PhanBoi pride, and that's worth less than zero right now, given Mr. Robert's behavior over the past 18 months.

      2) If you don't want people digging up personal info, don't use your full name in your publicly displayed email address on slashdot.

      3) Maybe someone will be nice enough to email you to apologize for being such a dick to you-- you know, after the big scandal where Infinium bombs and such-- cuz your spirit will be crushed enough already.

    22. Re:Here's my view on all this: by Fuzzle · · Score: 1

      Actually, what happened is that infinium threatened to sue, HardOCP ignored their request in the legal arena. Then Infinium threatened again, using a letter that seems to be written by either a first year law student or a drunkard, so HardOCP, in order to cease the endless stream of bullshit, decided to escalate matters to the legal arena.

    23. Re:Here's my view on all this: by MrLint · · Score: 1

      Well frankly i disagree. Based on what i saw on the IL site i didn't feel misled by the article at all.

    24. Re:Here's my view on all this: by doormat · · Score: 1

      Shut HardOCP down completely? Do you know how large the readership is??? How much money is involved? It would take a lot to get Kyle to flip the switch and turn HardOCP off... a hell of a lot...

      --
      The Doormat

      If you're not outraged, then you're not paying attention.
    25. Re:Here's my view on all this: by nomadic · · Score: 1

      I think this has gone a little bit too far. HardOCP posted an article that was quite misleading. I don't think they they maliciously *lied*, but definitely misled it's readers.

      How was it misleading? They got their facts from the Infinium CEO's own documents. Is there anything false in their article?

      I bet that HardOCP could have let the "lawsuit" slide and an out of court settlement would have happened, if anything. Now there WILL be a messy legal battle.

      A wha? An out of court settlement? What would that entail, Infinium isn't asking for damages, they're asking for injunctive relief? What exactly do you expect HardOCP to do?

    26. Re:Here's my view on all this: by metlin · · Score: 0, Offtopic

      Shoot, does Infinium even have anough employees to man a booth that size?


      Not man dude, *woman* - its E3 for heaven's sake!

      They'll borrow heavily bottomed lasses from the neighbourhood's stripclubs if they need people so badly ;-)

      Bah! Who goes to E3 to see the cool stuff anyway. Its all about the babes, baby. Ahan!

    27. Re:Here's my view on all this: by aliens · · Score: 1

      He claims to be a Phantom beta tester.

      Here ya go

      --
      -- taking over the world, we are.
    28. Re:Here's my view on all this: by dirk · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Personally, I'm glad you got flamed; you deserve it if you spoke out against HardOCP in this issue. As an Internet journalist and writer I think it's of extreme importance that everyone recognize that HardOCP is in the right in this matter according to the facts as they have been presented, and that Infinium Labs was appallingly wrong for doing what they did.

      While I think Infinium labs is wrong, I have to completely disagree with the idea that this guy deserved to be flamed. While you stand up for HardOCP's rights, you encourage people to shout down this guy if they disagree. Why encourage him to think about his position and state it eliquently if you are just going to shout him down when he does so? HE has every right to state his opinion just as HardOCP does. Just as you have every right to disagree. But flaming is not disagreeing, it is badgering, shouting down, and harassing without any intelligent thought. And that is the last thing anyone should be encouraging.

      --

      "Information wants to be expensive" - Stewart Brand, the same guy who said "Information wants to be free"
    29. Re:Here's my view on all this: by Fermier+de+Pomme+de · · Score: 2, Funny
      Infinium is saying they have a good legal hand so HardOCP should fold and go home.

      HardOCP thinks that there legal hand sux.

      HardOCP calls and says let's see the cards...

    30. Re:Here's my view on all this: by black+mariah · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Yes, by retracting some ambiguous statements and replacing them with some quite specific statements that basically were even more annoying than the originals, and completely in line with what Infinium was demanding.

      Notice how Infinium hasn't bothered to call Penny Arcade on their numerous articles on the Phantom. They probably know how big PA was and don't want to fuck with them. They probably had no clue about HardOCP and figured they'd be an easy target. Good guess, but wrong.

      --
      'Standards' in computing only impress those who are impressed by things like 'standards'.
    31. Re:Here's my view on all this: by fname · · Score: 0

      Man, I'm sure it's been posted 20+ times by now, and I'll probably be modded redundant, and no excuse for the class-A morons implicitly theatening you, but...

      You're a butthead! News organizations have no duty to remove or alter an article, pay a settlement fee, or even acknowledge someone who threatens to sue them for posting a "misleasing" article. Good lord, could you imagine the precedent this would set? Everytime a bad review is written about Ford or GM or Microsoft or Enron or MCI or Haliburton or Walmart or Costco, they would sue the publisher in question. Didn't mention that Ford has a full-size spare tire on the SUV-- you get sued for being misleading. Forget to refer to Walmart as America's leading retailer-- lawsuit!! Write that Haliburton may be over-charging taxpayers for services, see you in court buddy!

      I think this was a real popular thing to do back in the 70's against activists, when corporations would sue politicians or reporters in a vain attempt to muzzle them. These were termed SLAPP suits, and in response to them, laws were passed to punish the filers of these lawsuits.

      The 1st Amendment is one of, if not the, important piece of legislation we have in this country. Implicit in that is being able to say whatever the hell you want as long as it's not false & damaging. Misleading & damaging-- sorry, that's protected speech. False & pointless-- no harm, no foul. False & damaging-- OK, you can sue for that, but you better have an air-tight case.

      I hope Infinium gets there butts handed to them; and as for the next 2nd-rate outfit that wants to goes sue-happy in an attempt to silence their critics, I hope they think twice after watching Infinium get sanctioned for their mobster style tactics. And I hope you never get sued for writing a misleading review, because I bet it would suck.

    32. Re:Here's my view on all this: by sqlrob · · Score: 1

      . Between the press demo they did a few months ago for a few select members of the press (which at least had photos of the thing), to fact that they will have an 8,000 square foot booth [gamedaily.com] at E3 I think this might not be vaporware

      Duke Nukem Forever has been presented at E3 before. 'nuff said.

    33. Re:Here's my view on all this: by Daleks · · Score: 1

      That said, while I am still quite scepticle of the whole thing, I have to admit I no longer think the console is just vaporware.

      Looks like they're trying to hire vaporpeople to make vaporware. I don't see what the big deal is anyways. If a sweet new console comes out, great! If not, who cares?

    34. Re:Here's my view on all this: by smcn · · Score: 3, Funny
      they will have an 8,000 square foot booth at E3

      You can find a layout of their booth here
    35. Re:Here's my view on all this: by CKB2688 · · Score: 1

      I disagree with you I did my own research and found lots of stuff [H] left out, got wrong, or talked to the wrong people to get there information. Example when [H] contacted Wanforce they talked to a temp who didn't know what they where talking about.

    36. Re:Here's my view on all this: by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Three questions. What's up with the quotes around "home address"?? Are you Dr. Evil?? And why is it such a "big deal" people can find you? Are you trying to hide your "slashdot life" from your "real life"? Or maybe "vice versa"?? And why do you have to make a "disclaimer" saying those opinions are "your own" not infinium labs?? That just reeks of "quackery".

    37. Re:Here's my view on all this: by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Typical for a potential defendant facing threat of an out-of-state suit to jump the gun, file suit first using declaratory judgment act so as to hopefully lock down venue in HIS neck of the woods.

      Much easier to fight in your hometown than some far off venue.

    38. Re:Here's my view on all this: by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      While I think Infinium labs is wrong, I have to completely disagree with the idea that this guy deserved to be flamed. While you stand up for HardOCP's rights, you encourage people to shout down this guy if they disagree.

      Let's rephrase that.

      While I think the government is wrong, I have to completely disagree with the idea that they deserved to be flamed. While you stand up for peaceful protestors who were arrested , you encourage people to shout down this guy if they disagree.

      I highly suggest they shout that guy down. At the top of their lungs. Ignorance should not be tolerated.

    39. Re:Here's my view on all this: by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      HardOCP in its typical gamer-style "journalism" probably went a little too far on their editorial and now they can pay the price. For what it's worth, IMO, Infinium is probably worth about as much as a broken toilet...

      It's just hard to side with OCP when they have a tendency to color every "story" they run (again IMO). Maybe they should wake up to 2004 and figure out that they're all old dudes pretending to be c00l GaMeRz.

    40. Re:Here's my view on all this: by Unoti · · Score: 1

      Hey those aren't vaporpositions, those are dev positions! If they were hiring marketing people, ad artists, lawyers, and salespeople, that'd be different.

    41. Re:Here's my view on all this: by bugbread · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Actually, my guess is that they're underestimating the impact of PA. Since PA is basically talking smack, and HardOCP is talking facts, they're more worried about the effects on investors from actual dirt being dug up. Investors are unlikely to be swayed by PA's implications that Infinium's CEO is on LSD or kills dogs to orgasm, while the HardOCP article would make them look very hard at where they were going to put their money.

      On a side note, PA has been talking about going out to actually see the Phantom (apparently, they've been invited to check it out but have ignored the invitation, which comes as a bit of a shock)

    42. Re:Here's my view on all this: by bugbread · · Score: 1, Insightful

      "Additionally, I don't see how hard it is to believe in the Phantom's existence"

      I'd like to have evidence, not faith.


      I understand where you're coming from, and I disagree with the parent, but I don't think any more faith is needed to believe that some aspect of the Phantom exists than for me to believe you if you tell me you own a computer. Sure, you could do all your Slashdotting from an internet cafe, but if you tell me you have a computer, I'll believe you without evidence, because it's not a difficult matter. In the same way, for some working prototype of the Phantom to exist takes no real faith: it's just a computer with an unsual contents delivery platform. If the prototype doesn't have the contents delivery section finished, it's just a computer.

      I'll take it on faith, without evidence, that Infinium owns at least one computer.

    43. Re:Here's my view on all this: by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's odd that supporters of free speach would attempt to harass you in order to silence you.

      . . . either I don't understand this idea of free speach or some /.ers don't. Just because some of you don't like what he is saying you are not justified in harassing him. Don't you see how completely hypocritical that is?

    44. Re:Here's my view on all this: by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It does matter. Those people that have invested money or are considering investing money into this thing should know about the history of the employees of the company so they can determine if they are being scammed. It's too easy to set up a tech company, get some investors and then use all the money up paying the employees (who happened to form the company) and doing "research" just to declare bankruptcy. Unfortunately, and I don't know anything about this particular company, this is an easy way to get rich without having an actual product.

    45. Re:Here's my view on all this: by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      They probably know how big PA was and don't want to fuck with them.

      (finish shooting milk out my nose)

      Under US Law, you basically have no chance suing a comic strip or other comedic outlet (Frank Sinatra versus Doonsbury).

    46. Re:Here's my view on all this: by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Ok, posting of home addresses is a childish thing, that's all that needs to be said about that; but all things being equal, I think Infinium should be pwnt with the +5 BFG of legal destruction. Perhaps it would discourage other assholes from pulling similar stunts.

      That [H] is willing to be the one that wields said BFG is fine by me. I hope they don't underestimate it.

      The Phantom could exist--the technology is out there--but honestly, does anyone really feel it exists, deep down inside?

      Everything these guys have done in the past indicates scam, Infinium reaks of it.

    47. Re:Here's my view on all this: by Moofie · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Shouting people down is fine.

      Suing them for speaking is not.

      Free speech is a bitch somethetimes.

      --
      Why yes, I AM a rocket scientist!
    48. Re:Here's my view on all this: by black+mariah · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Under basic business sense you don't want to piss off your target audience by screwing with websites they frequent. That's another reason why Infinium wouldn't want to go after PA, because PA has a LARGE readership and every one of them is a potential customer. HardOCP, on the other hand, is geared more toward computer hardware than consoles (I am aware they cover consoles too, but it's mainly about computers).

      The comics PA does are one thing. There is very little you can say in a comic that isn't parody or protected somehow, that much is true, but the front page which usually harbors some more biting commentary is probably open season as far as libel is concerned.

      --
      'Standards' in computing only impress those who are impressed by things like 'standards'.
    49. Re:Here's my view on all this: by black+mariah · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Good point, but the front page commentary has been a bit more smack-talking than the comics have. Going as far as to call Infinium's CEO a 'huckster'. The LSD and dog kill orgasm (WOW, good band name...) things are obvious parody, but not everything they're saying is.

      I wouldn't be surprised if they got to wherever they were going to be shown the console and were then handed NDA's. Knowing those guys, they'd probably laugh their asses off and tell the Infinium dudes to lick Dave.

      --
      'Standards' in computing only impress those who are impressed by things like 'standards'.
    50. Re:Here's my view on all this: by the+arbiter · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Perhaps someone here can help me understand: it seems that requirements for the positions at Infinium posted on Craig's List are, well, odd.

      The "Senior Software Engineer" only has to have a Bachelor's degree? Four years experience? Strange.

      No mention of what test tools are to be used. This is bizarre. They vary somewhat, experience with one or another seems to be kind of, well, important.

      What dev platform is to be employed? Seems you'd want your coders to be familiar with it. Maybe they feel that the uber-coders with 3 years experience they're hiring will be competent and churn out perfect code with any or all of them.

      Software Program Manager performing systems engineering duties? Peculiar.

      This all strikes me as somewhat odd, certainly like nothing I've seen in my dev experience. Perhaps someone more enlightened than myself can grant me the benefit of their wisdom, for I am puzzled. Or geniunely retarded.

      --
      Boycott everything - they're all trying to fuck you one way or another
    51. Re:Here's my view on all this: by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      People pay for HardOCP?

      Frankly I have no clue how large the readership is. I read a lot of tech sites, but rarely HardOCP, unless it gets linked to.

      I've never found much worth reading there, and I certainly wouldn't PAY for it.

    52. Re:Here's my view on all this: by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Where's the fucking beef?

      Why, the beef is in the pudding.

    53. Re:Here's my view on all this: by bugbread · · Score: 0

      Color me stupid for not even thinking of the NDA counterdefense. Damn, and I was looking forward to hearing their impressions.

    54. Re:Here's my view on all this: by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Dude, in the big picture, Penny Arcade is smaller than your nuts. And that's saying something (badoom-boom).

      You can bet that if Penny Arcade was sued, they would first and foremost argue that they are a comic site and their editorials are protected by parody.

    55. Re:Here's my view on all this: by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      > only has to have a Bachelor's degree
      Any evidence that MSes or PhDs are better coders? Probably the reverse.

      > Four years experience?
      No old farts, thank you. We have a schedule to keep.

      > No mention of what test tools are to be used
      Why would test tools affect a developer hire? If they are smart, they can learn the tools.

      >What dev platform is to be employed
      If this isnt 100% clear from all the C++/Windows items, you certainly aren't qualified :)

    56. Re:Here's my view on all this: by brandorf · · Score: 1

      Man I applied to be a Beta Tester, Never, in all of my experience of beta testing, has any company asked for my resume. That's somewhat odd, don't you think?

      --


      Bork Bork Bork!!
    57. Re:Here's my view on all this: by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Holy crap, Jem .. I can hit your house with a golfball and a 7-iron (or maybe a CD ejected whilst spun up from a 52X drive) from where I live! ;-)

      -AC (a Fairport native for over 30 years)

    58. Re:Here's my view on all this: by ValourX · · Score: 1

      And you're not on the forums on The Jem Report? For shame!

      But yeah, it is a little odd finding locals on the wide world of Slashdot, isn't it?

      -Jem
    59. Re:Here's my view on all this: by Moraelin · · Score: 1

      The problem is that you're arguing with a fanboy and wannabe bully.

      The fanboy logic works somewhat like this: "My idol is by definition right and more infailible than the Pope. Anyone disaggreeing with my idol is the incarnation of pure evil and deserves a painful death." His issue isn't a free speech issue, it's simly "OMG!!! The bastards are picking on my idol!!! DIE! DIE! DIE!" Hence the double standards, and only supporting free speech for one side of the debate.

      I.e., you can argue until you're blue in the face about how free speech should go both ways. I don't expect any fanboy to suddenly understand it, nor to actually start caring about free speech. His issue is the clear and shut case of "you deserve it if you spoke out against HardOCP". That's really what it's all about.

      And, you know, I used to think school bullies were bad. In the meantime I've come to somewhat appreciate them. At least those had the "courage" to come punch you in the face personally, and accept whatever consequences that came from doing so. ("Courage" if you were half their size, that is.)

      The wannabe internet bully actually manages to be an even lower life form. It's the guy who always wanted to be a bully, but didn't have the balls to actually go beat someone up. But from the anonymity and isolation layer offere by the internet, he'll gladly post your email address for spammers, your phone number for other wannabe vigilantes to abuse, and your home address just in case someone wants to come inflict vigilante justice. Basically, still lacking the balls to personally do something and accept responsibility for it, he'll hope that someone else volunteers to do that for him.

      Lame. Real lame. I'm disappointed that such people even exis, but I guess I'll get used to it.

      --
      A polar bear is a cartesian bear after a coordinate transform.
    60. Re:Here's my view on all this: by Nogami_Saeko · · Score: 1

      Heck, they raised $29,000+ in around a week from their readers to help out a guy's family that had fallen on hard times.

      If HardOCP needed big money to help in a lawsuit that was a clear "load of crap", there would be a LOT of people donating to support them.

      --
      "Nothing strengthens authority so much as silence." - Charles de Gaulle
    61. Re:Here's my view on all this: by Alsee · · Score: 1

      HardOCP filed the lawsuit for them

      And what's wrong with that? If Infinium Labs letters and threats were genuine then HardOCP just saved them some paperwork.

      On the other hand if Infinium Labs's letters were fraudulent then they DESERVE to get hauled into court. Attempting to intimidate someone into sumbission through fraudulent legal threats is EXTORTION.

      -

      --
      - - You can't take something off the Internet! That's like trying to take pee out of a swimming pool.
    62. Re:Here's my view on all this: by Oliver+Wendell+Jones · · Score: 3, Informative

      Attempting to intimidate someone into sumbission through fraudulent legal threats is EXTORTION.

      No... attempting to intimidate someone with legal threats you have no intention to follow through with is called BARRATRY.

      --
      A computer once beat me at chess, but it was no match for me at kick boxing -- Emo Phillips
    63. Re:Here's my view on all this: by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Aren't you the jackass that claims to be a "beta tester", despite not having any hardware (or anything else) to test. You deserve to get flamed, Dr.Retardo.

    64. Re:Here's my view on all this: by MegaFur · · Score: 1

      It's tempting to rebut your post. But actually there is no need.

      If you are indeed correct on any of your points, the trial will likely bear that out.

      --
      Furry cows moo and decompress.
    65. Re:Here's my view on all this: by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      Btw, I am a law student.
      You have my deepest sympathies.
    66. Re:Here's my view on all this: by rabel · · Score: 1

      Well, the problem here is that Timothy Roberts is a scumbag. He could have written a nice note to Kyle, who would probably have responded, "too bad, so sad. You're a scumbag and I'm not changing anything."

      Mr. Roberts is just using lawyers to do his bitching and moaning so he can be perceived as some sort of threat and Kyle is just kickin' it right back at him. I say, way to go.

      If you bring lawyers into the fight you'd better be right, kind of like pulling a knife in a barroom scuffle. You'd better be prepared to cut or be cut when you start going down that road.

      I'm sick and tired of hearing the standard response from everyone in today's society is, "I'll sue you!" Kyle is fighting this and I'll back him up with a donation or three when the time comes.

    67. Re:Here's my view on all this: by Rallion · · Score: 1

      My idol is by definition right and more infailible than the Pope.

      Oh, come on. My cat is more infallible than the Pope.

    68. Re:Here's my view on all this: by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      Please learn to spell. "There" is not the same as "their."

      We'll work on your grammar next time.

  3. Suggestion: by niko9 · · Score: 5, Insightful

    New section for this website: lawsuits

    1. Re:Suggestion: by PeaceTank · · Score: 1

      Its sad but true. I hate the fact that more and more companies have to resort to lawsuits to "protect" their ideas. Ideas aren't property people. Alexander Graham Bell stole the idea of the telephone, Edison took the idea of the lightbulb. It's just how the world works. Either keep it secret (which is, I admit, very hard these days) or make yours good enough that no one could beat it.

    2. Re:Suggestion: by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Interesting

      >> New section for this website: lawsuits

      Graphic suggestion: Justitia (Lady Justice) as a Borg. I suggest a cute one like Seven of Nine, robe optional.

    3. Re:Suggestion: by Liselle · · Score: 3, Informative

      Hmm... do you mean something like this? There is already a "The Courts" topic, is that not specific enough?

      --
      Auto-reply to ACs: "Truly, you have a dizzying intellect."
    4. Re:Suggestion: by Trejkaz · · Score: 1

      I think the idea was more for a new top-level section, to get the crappy, overflowing legal bullshit off the main page.

      --
      Karma: It's all a bunch of tree-huggin' hippy crap!
    5. Re:Suggestion: by That's+Unpossible! · · Score: 4, Funny

      Why am I unable to hear the parent post in anything other than Comic Book Guy's voice?

      --
      Ironically, the word ironically is often used incorrectly.
    6. Re:Suggestion: by Ralph+Wiggam · · Score: 3, Informative

      Interesting offtopic anecdote:

      Soon after John Ashcroft took office, he had both Lady Justice and her male counterpart (who wears a loin cloth) in the Justice Department lobby covered in blue curtains. Both have been on display for 80 years. He was apparently terrified that his picture would be on the front page with an aluminium tit over his shoulder. The symbolism of shrouding Lady Justice is obviously lost on him.

      -B

    7. Re:Suggestion: by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      He considers justice to be vulgar.

    8. Re:Suggestion: by That's+Unpossible! · · Score: 1

      Actually, what was happening was photographers were going out of their way to take photographs with him and the statue's boobs as the central focus of the picture. He got tired of it, and had them put the blue curtains in front of the statues during press conferences. Yeah he's a prude, but this puts the matter in a bit of a different perspective I think.

      --
      Ironically, the word ironically is often used incorrectly.
  4. Is it just me? by paulschroeder · · Score: 5, Funny

    ...or does anyone else think of the organization from Robocop when they read "HardOCP?

    1. Re:Is it just me? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's just you.

    2. Re:Is it just me? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Well I think of HardCOCK, but thats just me.

    3. Re:Is it just me? by sakusha · · Score: 1

      No, it's not just you.

      DIRECTIVE 1 Serve the public trust

      DIRECTIVE 2 Protect the innocent

      DIRECTIVE 3 Uphold the law

      DIRECTIVE 4 Never oppose an OCP officer.

    4. Re:Is it just me? by VMaN · · Score: 1

      Omni Consumer Products.. I loved their little ads on TV in the movie..

    5. Re:Is it just me? by WD · · Score: 1

      I think Oatmeal Cream Pie

    6. Re:Is it just me? by drayzel · · Score: 0, Troll

      Hard Over Clocked Penis...

      not a troll let me explain.

      Overclocking is just a form of the pissing contest among geeks. Whoever has the fastest most overclocked machine thinks they are more of a man because of it. I started reading HardOCP about the same time I realized how silly the whole thing was and I still use the same lowly P2-400mhz and it is just fine.

      ~Z

  5. This just in... by LostCluster · · Score: 5, Funny

    Word has it that the Infinium console is going to be bundled with Duke Nukem Forever.

    1. Re:This just in... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Troll

      im going to kill the next person who uses this tired ass joke. got anything clever to say regarding our phantom overlords or perhaps soviet russia? for shame, "moderators"!

    2. Re:This just in... by Metallic+Matty · · Score: 1

      im going to kill the next person who uses this tired ass joke. got anything clever to say regarding our phantom overlords or perhaps soviet russia? for shame, "moderators"!

      All I've got to say is Mod Parent up! (Oh, and PS, please don't hurt me, I once made a reference to Infinium Labs and DNF.)

    3. Re:This just in... by screwballicus · · Score: 4, Funny

      You know what the best thing about Duke Nukem Forever's release will be?

      No more Duke Nukem Forever jokes.

      Think of the kittens....

    4. Re:This just in... by That_Guy_Again · · Score: 1
      Will it run Amiga OS 4.0?

      --
      One of life's lessons: Its always easier to ask for forgiveness than permission.
    5. Re:This just in... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      IN SOVIET RUSSIA:

      beowulf cluster of phantom overlords bundled with duke nukem kills YOU!

    6. Re:This just in... by Tarrek · · Score: 1

      Don't be so sure!

      Just remember that saying "Daikatana" can still crack up a room full of nerds to this very day!

    7. Re:This just in... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      But then it will be Team Fortress 2 jokes

    8. Re:This just in... by teval · · Score: 1

      And let's not forget it'll be running hurd.

    9. Re:This just in... by InfiniteWisdom · · Score: 1

      Instead we will have "After Duke Nukem is released... oh wait, ever mind" jokes.

    10. Re:This just in... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "crack up"?
      Shudder, more likely.

    11. Re:This just in... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Oh, how original, a DNF fanboy! You must be a big hit in the DNF forums with that attitude since you are the only ones that don't have their posts deleted or locked. I'm afraid you're going to have to accept that DNF and Glaze3d from the bitboys are the finest pieces of vaporware to date. However, it appears that the phantom is starting to look like a real contender.

    12. Re:This just in... by WWWWolf · · Score: 1

      Yeah, but just wait until the gamers start waiting for the first patch to the game... Game release in (conservatively estimating) 2020, the 1.1 patch in 2085!

    13. Re:This just in... by KevetS · · Score: 1

      bwahahahaha!

      --
      This is my United States of whatever.
  6. Holy crap! by Trillan · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Well, that's one way to completely fail to keep legal costs down.

    /me grabs a bag of popcorn and waits for the show...

    1. Re:Holy crap! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    2. Re:Holy crap! by Trillan · · Score: 1

      Possibly because it's an old saying that's been around for at least thirty years.

    3. Re:Holy crap! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "/me" has been around for 30 years? Prove it and I'll send you a check for $50.

    4. Re:Holy crap! by AvengerXP · · Score: 1

      You should never, EVER do that on Slashdot. Someone WILL find evidence. It's always funny to see editors use "never" and "always" in their articles, and get instantly corrected in the first 10 posts.

      --
      Trolls dont like to be Flamebait, because they burn so well. Protect our Troll heritage!
    5. Re:Holy crap! by CreamOfWheat · · Score: 0

      oh shit i crapped my pants damn it sme;lll like shit

    6. Re:Holy crap! by Trillan · · Score: 1

      I was referring to the popcorn comment. /me is a standard IRC command, which has been around since the late 80s... 15 years, not 30, but still a long time.

    7. Re:Holy crap! by Trillan · · Score: 1

      Try here: history of chat.

      Email me and I'll tell you where to send the cheque.

    8. Re:Holy crap! by liloconf · · Score: 0

      Unless they win of course, at which point they will get there legal fee's covered im sure...

  7. Penny Arcade better get moving by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Funny

    ...if they want to keep up with HardOCP. Maybe they can put their lawsuit in the form of a cartoon.

    1. Re:Penny Arcade better get moving by tacarat · · Score: 1

      Try one... or try another. -------------

      --
      "Common sense will be the death of us all"
  8. Then the court orders to produce evidence... by SharpFang · · Score: 3, Funny

    And in order to win, Infinitum Labs has to produce Phantom, that is all great, kicks major ass and generally proves all derogatory articles untrue. Case dismissed, gamers rejoice, console enters trade :)

    --
    45 5F E1 04 22 CA 29 C4 93 3F 95 05 2B 79 2A B2
    1. Re:Then the court orders to produce evidence... by MrLint · · Score: 1

      Well not exactly. One would have to refute the claim made in the article at the time it was written. I said in another topic on this subject, i scoured their site and i haven't seen anything that doesn't look like a 3d rendering. Asking for Il to send pictures isn't relevant. hardOCP went on publicly available info.

    2. Re:Then the court orders to produce evidence... by Trejkaz · · Score: 1

      Hehe. Whereas this would be great, I somehow doubt that producing one would help their, because everything offered in the article was sane reasoning at the time, nothing was incorrect, and producing a Phantom for the court will hardly undo Infinium's letters.

      --
      Karma: It's all a bunch of tree-huggin' hippy crap!
    3. Re:Then the court orders to produce evidence... by bugbread · · Score: 0

      At the time the article was written, true. Right now, true. However, during the span between about 6 months ago and last week? False. They had a whole thread called "photos of the Phantom" (or something along those lines) on their forum, with clearly real photos of...well...of a PC with a case mod, but that's what the Phantom basically is anyway.

      Plus, looking around on various game sites will find youpictures of the Phantom, the back input panel, etc.

  9. Business Models by dirkdidit · · Score: 4, Funny

    So apparently nobody's business model revolves around selling anything anymore, just suing the shit out of everything that makes them pissed off?

    First SCO, now Infinium. They should merge and specialize in lawsuits.

    1. Re:Business Models by 0racle · · Score: 1

      At least SCO actually has a product line,. Personally, I think naming it the Phantom was a big joke in the beginning.

      --
      "I use a Mac because I'm just better than you are."
    2. Re:Business Models by AstrumPreliator · · Score: 1

      It's the wave of the future man! Get in on the ground floor or get sued! Making stuff is so old fashioned, make millions of dollars with the tried and true "sue everyone" business. Call 555-9123 to get your free information pack today!

    3. Re:Business Models by TheViffer · · Score: 1

      Might be a good match. Phantoms running SCO OS.

      SCO as a gaming OS. Might as well .. it is already considered a joke amoung professionals.

      This is about the only way SCO could get there OS distributed anymore is by brute force upon the uninformed.

      --
      -- Knowing too much can get you killed, but knowing who knows too much can make you rich.
  10. Penny-Arcade by Digitus1337 · · Score: 5, Informative

    Penny-Arcade attacked them over this (infinitum); the strip can be seen here. The CEO also states this to which Penny-Arcade responded with "So Tim thinks we did that comic strip to get more traffic driven to our site. That's a nice thought Tim but you're way off. You see unlike Infinium Labs and your doomed console, Penny Arcade is successful. How can I say this without sounding like an asshole? Penny Arcade has more readers in a given second than your site will ever have even if it were to sit and rot on the internet until time ends and the universe implodes. Hmmm, I guess I can't. Tim also says we called him to let him know it's all in fun. This again is bullshit. I don't care if he likes the comic or not. I've certainly never called the guy and I have no intention of doing so. Bottom line, the guy is a lying huckster. I guess he figured he could post that on his forum and we'd never see it. This proves he has no concept of how huge PA is. Penny Arcade isn't just a comic and a news post Tim, PA is a community and we have agents everywhere. Chances are they're watching you even now." These guys love to get into this kind of stuff.

    1. Re:Penny-Arcade by LostCluster · · Score: 1

      At least Infinium understands why they're being mocked... understanding that there's a problem is the first step towards recovery from lawsuit addiction.

    2. Re:Penny-Arcade by blackeye · · Score: 5, Funny

      Another poke from PA today. With posting comics every other day, they're falling behind!

    3. Re:Penny-Arcade by Trejkaz · · Score: 3, Funny

      Never mind that they posted four articles in one day... now that was falling behind!

      --
      Karma: It's all a bunch of tree-huggin' hippy crap!
  11. Headline isn't really accurate. by mcc · · Score: 5, Informative

    The way it looked to me they weren't suing them, just asking for a declaratory judgement. I guess it's a kind of lawsuit, but it looked more like HardOCP just telling a judge "These people keep threatening to sue us and it's creating uncertainty. Could you just just decide, let's pretend they'd sued us over the stuff they're threatening to sue over, hypothetically then who would win?". I don't know. i don't really understand it.

    1. Re:Headline isn't really accurate. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Funny

      I don't know. i don't really understand it.

      Which is why, of course, you have a score of: 5, Informative. Makes perfect sense.

    2. Re:Headline isn't really accurate. by mcc · · Score: 1

      Welcome to Slashdot.

    3. Re:Headline isn't really accurate. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      haha i was just gonna post that.. slashdot moderators are on crack.. interesting post.. insightful,sure.. but informative?!?

    4. Re:Headline isn't really accurate. by Aerion · · Score: 5, Informative

      The Declaratory Judgment Act, under which HardOCP is "suing," allows "any court of the United States, upon the filing of an appropriate pleading, may declare the rights and other legal relations of any interested party seeking such declaration, whether or not further relief is or could be sought."

      Also, "Any such declaration shall have the force and effect of a final judgment or decree and shall be reviewable as such." So even if this isn't technically a "lawsuit," its result will have the same effect as the result of a hypothetical suit against HardOCP.

      (You don't really need to be told that IANAL, do you?)

    5. Re:Headline isn't really accurate. by parliboy · · Score: 1

      Ah, but this is the difference between informative and insightful. It's informative in that he's pointing out the nature of the filing. It's not insightful at all, however, in that's he's clueless about what it means.

      --
      "You're never ready, just less unprepared."
    6. Re:Headline isn't really accurate. by sakusha · · Score: 2, Insightful

      IANAL, but this seems like the only way for HardOCP to counter these legal threats. Note that the letters were written by an Infinium person, not a lawyer. A real lawyer wouldn't make threats like "remove THIS content or I'll sue." No lawyer would ever do it, they'd first write a cease and desist letter, then if no action was taken, they'd sue without further notice. You can't say things like "if you don't do X, I'll sue you." That is barratry, using a threat of lawsuit for extortion. You get disbarred for making threats like that.

    7. Re:Headline isn't really accurate. by bernywork · · Score: 1

      Extremely funny, love your work!

      --
      Curiosity was framed; ignorance killed the cat. -- Author unknown
    8. Re:Headline isn't really accurate. by black+mariah · · Score: 1

      Considering that the parent was right, I'd say that 5 was deserved.

      --
      'Standards' in computing only impress those who are impressed by things like 'standards'.
    9. Re:Headline isn't really accurate. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "(You don't really need to be told that IANAL, do you?)"

      No but you need to be a little anal to understand it.

    10. Re:Headline isn't really accurate. by TRINITE · · Score: 1

      So can I start calling this a "phantom" lawsuit? Oh well, pretty soon they're just going to be a "phantom" company. And when the investors come knocking, I'll best they'll be hunting for some "phantom" executives, too. Too bad they didn't only invest "phantom" money in Infinium.

    11. Re:Headline isn't really accurate. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Actually it's "right" but slightly misleading. There is a concept in law referred as res judicada which states that, basically, all issues fully litigated cannot be relitigated at a later hearing or trial. Therefore, this procedure can be binding on the parties. To dispel any doubt that an action under this statute is likely binding congress has added the phrase "Any such declaration shall have the force and effect of a final judgment or decree and shall be reviewable as such." To state this another way, HardOCP.com has essentially filed the lawsuit for infenium rather than tolerate their threats. If a judge, at this trial, determines that the libel or slander claim has no merit it's over. I hope Infenium wasn't bluffing because this finding (assuming it is not in their favor) will likely be a final determination on the merits of the issue they intend to pursue. Even if infenium wins they still have to seek damages and further relief in another court.

      Oh, here's a passage from the act:

      "Sec. 2201. - Creation of remedy

      (a)

      In a case of actual controversy within its jurisdiction, except with respect to Federal taxes other than actions brought under section 7428 of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, a proceeding under section 505 or 1146 of title 11, or in any civil action involving an antidumping or countervailing duty proceeding regarding a class or kind of merchandise of a free trade area country (as defined in section 516A(f)(10) of the Tariff Act of 1930), as determined by the administering authority, any court of the United States, upon the filing of an appropriate pleading, may declare the rights and other legal relations of any interested party seeking such declaration, whether or not further relief is or could be sought. Any such declaration shall have the force and effect of a final judgment or decree and shall be reviewable as such."

      BTW, IAAA but this is not my area of practice.

  12. Interesting choice of law firm... by LostCluster · · Score: 4, Interesting

    A little quick googling on the term Storm &Hemingway reveals that the law firms primary business is usually on the plantiff's side of copyright and trademark disputes... they're the guys who go after those who are infringing.

    Nice to see that they can take a /. friendly position too...

    1. Re:Interesting choice of law firm... by Amarok.Org · · Score: 4, Interesting

      It's not such a strange move... if you're afraid that a particular firm might get used against you, you engage their services first. You prevent your opponent from being able to use them, as no firm can represent both sides in a dispute (it's just a minor conflict of interest).

      --
      -- "Other than that, how was the play Mrs. Lincoln?"
    2. Re:Interesting choice of law firm... by Sentry21 · · Score: 1

      Nice to see that they can take a /. friendly position too...

      Think more along the lines of a 'money friendly position'. They specialize in copyright and trademark disputes, so they get hired by people who want to sue people. No reason they can't defend.

      --Dan

    3. Re:Interesting choice of law firm... by Sangui5 · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Saying that it isn't a strange move is an understatement--large corps regularly retain counsel simply to monopolize the availability of the best firms. On the up side, that every large corp is attempting this tends to fragment the law firms--if Ford has a firm on retainer, then somebody else can hire that firm to fight Toyota, and vise versa. So the little guy isn't completely screwed, unless you'd like to sue an entire industry. But if you have that many enemies, you're SOL anyway...

    4. Re:Interesting choice of law firm... by BobTheLawyer · · Score: 1

      yeah, that's really plausible - I can see Hard OCP would be terrified that the internationally famed firm of Storm and Hemingway might act against them.

    5. Re:Interesting choice of law firm... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

      "But if you have that many enemies, you're SOL anyway..."

      You misspelled SCO.

    6. Re:Interesting choice of law firm... by Amarok.Org · · Score: 1
      terrified that the internationally famed firm

      Blah, blah, blah. Sarcasm aside, there's no telling why any particular client picks any particular firm. So, BobTheLawyer, why do you (in your obvious legal expertise) believe they would select this firm?
      --
      -- "Other than that, how was the play Mrs. Lincoln?"
    7. Re:Interesting choice of law firm... by BobTheLawyer · · Score: 1

      I have no clue (a recomendation from someone? a contact there?), but your suggestion was just daft.

    8. Re:Interesting choice of law firm... by Amarok.Org · · Score: 1
      your suggestion was just daft.

      My comment was directed at the general practice of retaining counsel in order to prevent the same counsel from representing your opponent. This is a common tactic used by countless companies and organizations. The original poster wondered why an entity might employ the services of a firm that traditionally handles the "other" side of this type of dispute. My suggestion was perfectly valid.

      Your 'nay-saying' contributes nothing, however. In your legal studies, you might have heard this referred to as "irrelevant". Look it up if you're unfamiliar.

      --
      -- "Other than that, how was the play Mrs. Lincoln?"
    9. Re:Interesting choice of law firm... by BobTheLawyer · · Score: 1

      The practice you described isn't really common at all - it's only used when an attorney or firm is so famed or so expert in a particular field that the client believes they could potentially swing the case. David Boies, for example. It's irrelevant to the likes of Storm and Hemingway.

      I'm sorry you don't like being criticised. In my legal studies, we referred to this attitude as "childish".

    10. Re:Interesting choice of law firm... by Amarok.Org · · Score: 1
      The practice you described isn't really common at all

      Perhaps we need to define some metrics. I consider thousands upon thousands of incidents of this behavior to be "common". Possibly you have a different interpretation.
      I'm sorry you don't like being criticised.

      I'm all for being reasonably criticised. You just seem unqualified to do so.
      In my legal studies, we referred to this attitude as "childish".

      I'll note that it was you who decided to degrade into name-calling. I'll also allow you to draw your own conclusions as to who is childish.

      Not terribly surprising for a lawyer, however. I say this not as an uninformed stereotype of the legal profession, but rather as a professional who has had dealings with all levels of the legal field - from ambulance chasers (a category that I strongly suspect to which you belong) to high-profile criminal defense attorneys to corporate counsel for Fortune 500 companies. In my experience, most of them are quite unable to handle someone challenging their little isolated worldview.


      Have a nice life, BobTheLawyer. (I wonder if this is the second profession of BobTheBuilder)

      --
      -- "Other than that, how was the play Mrs. Lincoln?"
  13. Score one for the good guys? by Metallic+Matty · · Score: 1

    After reading about SCO in the last news post, I can't help but be glad to see the idiot get the working end of the legal stick for a change.

  14. Good job HardOCP by jimbosworldorg · · Score: 5, Interesting
    I'm glad HardOCP is putting their money right where their mouth is. I'm sick and tired of seeing people back fearfully away from any jackass with a lawyer.

    After all, failure to stand up to legal badgering is exactly WHY we're such a litigious society today - because of the payoff.

    --

    Coming soon to Slashdot: meta-meta-moderation!

  15. ObSimpsons quote by gad_zuki! · · Score: 2, Funny

    Jimbo Jones: You let me down, man. Now I don't believe in nothing no more. I'm going to law school.

    Homer: Noooo!

  16. Bigger problems by CovertBeaver · · Score: 4, Funny

    I think Infinium should be more worried about what the SPCA will have to say about this.

  17. Does TX have an anti-SLAPP law? by phr2 · · Score: 3, Informative
    California does, so if this suit had happened there, HardOCP would be in a position to collect money damages, from what I understand. (SLAPP = Strategic Lawsuit Against Public Participation, when someone exercises First Amendment rights and you sue them to intimidate them into shutting up).

    California Anti-SLAPP Project

    1. Re:Does TX have an anti-SLAPP law? by nomadic · · Score: 1

      Well it was filed in federal court, but that wouldn't stop them from adding a state count if Texas had it. They can also hit the lawyers with FRCP Rule 11 sanctions, as it seems they're gonna have to fabricate a cause of action as there certainly doesn't seem to be one here.

    2. Re:Does TX have an anti-SLAPP law? by Roger+Keith+Barrett · · Score: 1

      Are you kidding? You're talking about Texas. Do you think Dubya would of permited such a thing?

      As recently as the 70s, they still had a defense in the Murder statute called the "He needed killin'" clause. Now, if they hadn't gotten rid of THAT there would at least been THAT recourse in the law for the common man to fall back on!

      --

      Why don't you embrace your slashbotness instead of living in a dreamworld?
  18. Well, I guess it was inevitable... by amuro98 · · Score: 4, Interesting

    As SCO has shown us, when you can't make money by producing useful products, you can always make money by suing people.

    The article that Inifium is annoyed at is over a year old now. Wasn't Infium's Phantom supposed to have already hit the market by now?

    If anything, HardOCP's article should act as a warning to investors that infinium is just a scam.

    1. Re:Well, I guess it was inevitable... by Neppy · · Score: 1

      Sept 17, 2003 - March 3, 2004 is 6 months not 1 year. As you said Infinium is following the SCO example - relevance, importance, intelligence, and currentness need not apply.

    2. Re:Well, I guess it was inevitable... by El · · Score: 1

      As SCO has shown us, when you can't make money by producing useful products, you can always make money by suing people. Wouldn't they have to actually collect some of that money to show us that? Lawyering 101: don't sue anybody that doesn't have enough money to make it worthwhile. I once got sued for $500,000. I drove to court in my old, beat up motorhome, showed to the plaintiff's lawyer, told him "See that? I live in that. It's my only asset. You can try to take it away from me, but I owe far more on it than it's currently worth. Oh, and sorry I don't have a permanent address you can send summons too, or a job that you can garnish wages from." For some reason, he advised his client to drop the case...

      --

      "Freedom means freedom for everybody" -- Dick Cheney

    3. Re:Well, I guess it was inevitable... by lavalyn · · Score: 1

      you can always make money by suing people.

      Except it doesn't. SCO made $20,000 on $3M in costs.

      --
      Doing the Right Thing should not be preempted by making a buck.
  19. About Your NDA. by DAldredge · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Doesn't your NDA prohibit you from talking about the product you are testing?

    1. Re:About Your NDA. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Funny

      I don't think that goes into effect until they actually send out test units.

  20. I think of Naughty by Nature. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    You down with OCP?
    Yeah! You know me.
    Who down with OCP?
    Every pad jockey.
    You down with OCP?
    Yeah! You know me.
    Who down with OCP?
    All the n00b3z.

  21. I'm holding out .... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    for the Duke Nuk'em Forever and Stars! Supernova Genesis double pack!!

  22. Too late.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    SCO beat them too it.

  23. Law firms... by DAldredge · · Score: 1

    Law firms don't take positions, they take clients. And, in most cases, as look as it doesn't get them disbared they will do as the client wishes.

  24. What, they found them? by cryptor3 · · Score: 5, Funny
    Documents were served to Infinium Labs representatives in Florida yesterday.

    Wait, they found an address and someone to serve the papers to? Looks like Infinium Labs is making progress...

    1. Re:What, they found them? by MREBoy · · Score: 1

      According to an article on GamersMark.com, the corporate HQ for Infinium is in downtown Sarasota, Florida.

      Also, a link provided from an earlier /. article shows that Mr. Roberts lives on Longboat Key, which is also in Sarasota County (link is in Roblimo's story).

      The point: I live in Sarasota. I could drive to Infinium's HQ in less than 5 minutes, his house in about 15... What do I get for posting snapshots ? :)

      MRE

      ___

      --
      http://www.slagg.org - LAN Gaming in Sarasota FL, USA
    2. Re:What, they found them? by Lando · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Not really making progress. They are a public company now due to some waving of stocks at the end of 2003, acquiring some guy's consulting firm.

      So they have had to have a viable business address to get the paperwork filed..

      Anyway... I find it interesting reading the SEC filings that their whole concept comes down to a VPN to deliver content which they haven't started on yet.

      Reading the latest reviews, where they actually show a box... Nice packaging, but couple of thoughts... If they are running a vpn and drm why do they need to communicate with ssl? Additional thoughts abound as to how long they expect their ssl encryption to be valid as one side the the communication is compromised...

      Shrug, must be one of those things like the sealed unit the console comes in. It's impossible to take the plastic appart to get at the insides... right?

      Anyway, all smoke and mirrors so far. I like how they have $5000 stock, no incoming capital, yet set the value of the stock to 5000 times it's starting price and run a 4 to 1 split on all outstanding stock... wow, instead of $5k they are now worth a cool $25 million... Oh and they say their chief competitors are xbox, nintendo and sony. Somehow I doubt even if they did have $25 million they could compete head to head with their competition...

      Just goes to show what I know about business... I always thought it was about trying to make a product which you then sold to make money.

      --
      /* TODO: Spawn child process, interest child in technology, have child write a new sig */
    3. Re:What, they found them? by Mateito · · Score: 0

      What do I get for posting snapshots ? :)

      KARMA

    4. Re:What, they found them? by PMuse · · Score: 1

      From the article, On February 27, [HardOCP] filed a lawsuit in the United States District Court for the Northern District of Texas, Dallas Division.... Documents were served to Infinium Labs representatives in Florida yesterday.

      It's possible that HardOCP just wanted any suit to be in the Federal Court in Texas instead of the court in Florida. Far cheaper for them that way.

      --
      "We reject as false the choice between our safety and our ideals." --The American President (20.1.2009)
    5. Re:What, they found them? by Lando · · Score: 1

      Yep as the other says karma... Would like to see some current photos. Try to include the building number and street name as such so that we can see that the place is the place...

      The photo hardocp has is of a drop mailing place photo's of the current location would be much appreciated.

      --
      /* TODO: Spawn child process, interest child in technology, have child write a new sig */
    6. Re:What, they found them? by MREBoy · · Score: 1

      http://hardforum.com/showthread.php?s=&threadid=73 8108

      ask and ye shall receive.

      MRE

      ___

      --
      http://www.slagg.org - LAN Gaming in Sarasota FL, USA
  25. The reason of US decline? by Roger+Keith+Barrett · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I propose a reason for the decline of relevance of US: the amount of money used going for lawsuits (defending against bad claims and making those bad claims) vs. the amount of money that goes to new developing new ideas. so... basically, it's asshole businessmen and CEOs that see a better living from the civil law system than actually thinking themselves. Maybe if all this effort was refocused all these WELL TRAINED tech people would actually have a job. Time to expire ALL of tort law and begin again...

    --

    Why don't you embrace your slashbotness instead of living in a dreamworld?
    1. Re:The reason of US decline? by nomadic · · Score: 1

      I propose a reason for the decline of relevance of US: the amount of money used going for lawsuits (defending against bad claims and making those bad claims)vs. the amount of money that goes to new developing new ideas

      a) what decline, and b) what operation are you trying to perform with the two variables?

      Time to expire ALL of tort law and begin again...

      So we should throw out 900 years of legal development because you don't like some of the people who file lawsuits?

    2. Re:The reason of US decline? by Roger+Keith+Barrett · · Score: 2, Insightful

      a) what decline

      The last time I looked, we were supposed to be a country of INDIVIDUAL liberty. We are NOT a country of individual liberty anymore, we're a country where huge powerful organiztaions beat up on little people for their own reasons. When the constitution was created it was because a huge organization was beating up little people, but then it was a government. Now it's concentrations of people and momeny called corporations... it's the same thing. Going back to that state of being is a decline, IMHO.

      So we should throw out 900 years of legal development because you don't like some of the people who file lawsuits?

      What I like is not relevant... the problem is that tort law has become a sword instead of a shield. And the US laws that create this problem are NOT 900 years old.

      All laws should expire on their own anyway... they were never meant to work forever in all situations.

      --

      Why don't you embrace your slashbotness instead of living in a dreamworld?
    3. Re:The reason of US decline? by nomadic · · Score: 1

      The last time I looked, we were supposed to be a country of INDIVIDUAL liberty. We are NOT a country of individual liberty anymore, we're a country where huge powerful organiztaions beat up on little people for their own reasons. When the constitution was created it was because a huge organization was beating up little people, but then it was a government. Now it's concentrations of people and momeny called corporations... it's the same thing. Going back to that state of being is a decline, IMHO.

      Oh, I agree, which is why I'm thankful for strong tort laws. At the moment it's one of the few things keeping large corporations from steamrolling over individuals.

      What I like is not relevant... the problem is that tort law has become a sword instead of a shield. And the US laws that create this problem are NOT 900 years old.

      Tort law in this country evolved from the English common law, and law textbooks will cite cases that old in showing the evolution of, for example, writs of trespass.

    4. Re:The reason of US decline? by Dalcius · · Score: 1

      A lot of it is the citizens who support -- or, rather, don't oppose -- legislation and judge elections which let this crap go through.

      If sane legislators wouldn't pass a law against all the minor injustices and sane judges would throw out lame cases and fine the plaintiff for wasting the court's time and the people's money, this wouldn't be an issue.

      But of course this would all take effort on the part of the population, so blaming the lawyers* and CEOs** is all that is usually done.

      *Lawyers are just mouthpieces to me; if a law is in place to give someone power to do something, I can't see blaming the (scumbag) lawyer who exploits it.

      **CEOs/companies are not without blame, they ARE the reason these things happen. But given human nature, bad folks will never go away, which is why we can't just hope for World Peace in our lifetimes.

      Cheers

      --
      ~Dalcius
      Rome wasn't burnt in a day.
    5. Re:The reason of US decline? by Dhalka226 · · Score: 1

      I agree that judges should clamp down harder, especially when it is fairly clear that parties are stalling.

      However, the reason we have so many lawsuits, at least as a constitutional law teacher back in high school explained, is the 7th amendment which reads: "In suits at common law, where the value in controversy shall exceed twenty dollars, the right of trial by jury shall be preserved, and no fact tried by a jury, shall be otherwise reexamined in any court of the United States, than according to the rules of the common law."

      He, at least, reads this to mean that people have a constitutional right to file lawsuits. If this is indeed the case--I can't quote precedent because I never asked him to, but he was quite a brilliant guy who could always quote cases off the top of his head--then what people want, even judges and legislators, wouldn't mean a lot.

      The problem with throwing out frivolous lawsuits is that you have to determine they're frivolous, and that of course means in the legal sense. For example with the SCO matters they are alledging things that they have the right to claim damages for so the judge has to persue it. And even if, say, SCO stalled long enough that the judge dismissed the case, they would almost certainly dismiss it without prejudice, meaning that SCO could file the same suit again and begin anew.

      It's tough. I'm sick of the lawsuits too. What I honestly think needs to change for them to stop is the greed. Even if you are legally right to sue a homeowner who did not keep the sidewalk in front of their house shoveled, or the store who forgot to put a "Wet Floor" sign out after mopping, doesn't mean you should run off to find an attorney. As long as that is a person's first instinct, we'll have this problem.

  26. Infinium is real, thier forums prove it... by DangerSteel · · Score: 5, Funny
    I was on the Infinium/Phantom forums last week checking out what people were saying about HardOCP and what kind of games they hope come out and how they can't wait to order thier unit online starting March 31st. I tried to go to the forums today to see what new they had to say about the HardOCP lawsuit. And guess what?

    Thier forums are "down for maintenance" I guess that makes sense, they must need the hard drive in that server for the Phantom unit they will demo at E3 coming up. Well I sure hope after E3 they put the forum drive back in thier server !

  27. So Penny Arcade just might be right... by mobiux · · Score: 4, Funny
  28. Sure, I will. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    You seem to be very confused about whether you are talking about an actual situation or a hypothetical one.

    My belief about this is that you're delibirately walking the line, so that if any point goes against you, you can claim "Oh, well, I was just using it as an example." But if any point goes for you, you'll be quick to post about how you were right.

    I strongly suggest you present a single face in this, whatever face you decide on. This two-facedness is boring, tiring, and the sign of a true forum weasel.

    But that's just my opinion.

  29. Bullshit Artist by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    A major weakness in all bullshit artists (Tim Roberts) is projection, they assume that as they are fakes, so is everyone else. The legal threats come from this assumpsion; HardOCP wouldn't do anything and just cave.

    This is great... I'm sure everyone knows someone like Tim Roberts and its nice to see them getting taken down.

  30. Litigation by DigiShaman · · Score: 1

    It's just that litigation is shaping the implementation of technology in an unfavorable way. Especially in the name of consumer rights and innovation in the tech sector.

    --
    Life is not for the lazy.
  31. I overheard Infinium is using Sys V code by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Whats SCO's #?

  32. Come on guys by HeLLLight · · Score: 1
    Whats with all this litigation at the moment? Come on guys can't we all be one happy dysfunctional family?

    "Hugs not err ummm Lawsuits??!!"

  33. You can sue over legal threats? by krusadr · · Score: 4, Funny

    Ooooooh SCO.

    You are so in the shit.

    --
    while sco {
    wget -O /dev/null http://www.sco.com?sco=litigious%20bastards
    }
  34. Where did IL's fourms go? by IgD · · Score: 4, Informative

    Shortly after this fiasco began, IL took their forums offline. One guy wrote he was a millionaire investor and wanted to tour IL so he could vouch for their credibility. Others questioned the lawsuit and asked specifically what was wrong with the HardOCP article. I don't think anyone ever got a meaningful reply. The former forums can be found at http://forum.phantom.net. All that is there now is a message that reads "We will be re-launching the forums soon. Down for maintainance, we are upgrading to new software and adding more features. Admin."

  35. Great advertising by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Interesting

    I can't think of a better way to increase readership than what Hardocp is doing. I doubt seriously there's any risk. Hell I should start a web site and sue SCO, I bet I'd be in the top 10 most read within days.

    1. Re:Great advertising by lordbeejee · · Score: 1

      This is not a stunt just for the attention if you mean that. The article is several months old and the only reason it's still in the current news is because HardOCP has been repeatedly contacted by these laywers who demand the removal of the article.If they didn't keep banging on the subject no action would have been needed by HardOCP and the article would not even be remembered.

  36. What is OCP? by baywulf · · Score: 0, Offtopic

    And why is it hard?

    1. Re:What is OCP? by doormat · · Score: 1

      for the uninitiated:

      Hard Overclockers Comparison Page

      --
      The Doormat

      If you're not outraged, then you're not paying attention.
    2. Re:What is OCP? by DomCurtis187 · · Score: 0

      i've heard:
      Hard OverClockers Page
      Hard OverClockers Paradise
      Hard OverClockers Portal

      Hard Overclockers Comparison Page sounds stupid, like it's a corral for a bunch of lame hax0r kiddies...
      oh, wait, that's HardForum!

    3. Re:What is OCP? by MachDelta · · Score: 1
      Hard Overclockers Comparison Page sounds stupid, like it's a corral for a bunch of lame hax0r kiddies... oh, wait, that's HardForum!
      Someone on /. calling HardForum a cesspool?
      Oh the irony. It's almost nauseating.
    4. Re:What is OCP? by nytmare · · Score: 1

      Hard = hardware, methinks.

  37. I think this was a good idea. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    From their perspective anyway. They'd be crazy not to do this. Put yourself in their shoes. Would YOU want to deal with a forum raid from SLASHDOT? And yes, one would be inevitable. It would be a terrible thing to behold.

  38. To sue for libel you have to show damage... by Lunabean · · Score: 5, Interesting
    I shared a few of my thoughts on the other Infinium Labs post, but as the day has gone on, I've thought more about it and have a few more questions.

    Now, as I understand libel, for the case to stand, two things need to be proven. First, the accused deliberately lied. Second, the accuser needs proof that they were damaged by said lies. Now, the first is hard enough to prove. I, personally, don't think HardOCP set out to mislead and lie in their article, but I could see how that could be debated. However, I don't think Infinium Labs has an iota of a chance proving HardOCP's article, published five months ago, has hurt their company. Infinium Labs doesn't even have a product on the market yet, and, as someone else pointed out, type in "Phantom Console" into Google and you'll find several slams on the company.

    If Infinium Labs doesn't get launch that it expects, they only have themselves and their sketchy business practices to blame. They are an enigma wrapped in a puzzle drizzled with secret sauce. They created the atmosphere for speculation...and people began to speculate.

    Now, I'm not someone who plans on linking to my site with every post I make here, but, again, I am linking to the message that was posted on my forums yesterday. It is a copy of the e-mail sent to HardOCP, before HardOCP made it public.

    I checked the e-mail of the poster, which began with "twcbinc". I Googled that and it led me to a user at the Console Gamer Network. The user's e-mail at the Network was timr@phantom.net. Now, this didn't mean much, but it was interesting. A mod on my boards also found the post odd and traced the IP to Infinium Labs.

    Now, I'm not saying this is illegal, or even bad, but I think it's sketchy, to say the least...and I think acts like this pretty much destroy any libel case they may have. Infinium Labs is hurting themselves with every step they make...and I think any judge who looks at their tactics and history will see that. Here's the link to the post on my boards: http://www.lunabean.com/forums/index.php?showtopic =2428

    1. Re:To sue for libel you have to show damage... by MrLint · · Score: 1

      we have words for what you are describing. the first is spin, and the second is astroturf.

    2. Re:To sue for libel you have to show damage... by 88NoSoup4U88 · · Score: 1
      It's pretty obvious it's the same guy at work here :
      If you compare his post made here
      http://www.penny-arcade.com/post.jpg
      with the post over at
      http://ve3dboards.ign.com/General_News/b10496/1452 2339/?22

      You will notice the guy's intelligent use of 'there' instead of 'their' in both those posts.

    3. Re:To sue for libel you have to show damage... by emtboy9 · · Score: 1

      You will notice the guy's intelligent use of 'there' instead of 'their' in both those posts.

      You just described a lot of slashdot posters...

      there grasp of english is teh suck this i say. ;)

      --
      "Our funds have never taken part in toxic or death spiral convertible financings of any sort" -BayStar's managing partne
  39. I'd file a suit... by jcims · · Score: 1

    just so i could say these guys were representing me...

  40. USPTO sucks at trademarks too it seems... by Satan's+Librarian · · Score: 4, Interesting
    Kinda funny, Phantom registered "Built by Gamers, for Gamers" - there's a "tm" at the end of the product sheet on their site. Apparently, it actually is registered, too.

    But, seems like that's a pretty common phrase in the industry and has been so for years....

    Hell, it's even used to refer to [H]ard|OCP's own RatPadz.

    A poster above suggested a new section on Slashdot for lawsuits... I think that's a great idea. SCO's newsworthy lawsuits may be dying out finally, but Phantom might keep the section viable for a year by itself. Especially if that "Pre-Order" link starts working and consumers get suckered as well as investors, or if they decide to defend their *cough* "Intellectual Property" *cough* by suing half the gaming industry for trademark infringement.

    Wonder if that's where they hope to make a profit?

    1. Re:USPTO sucks at trademarks too it seems... by rei_slashdot · · Score: 3, Informative

      Interplay has had "By Gamers for gamers" for YEARS. I say Interplay sues Infinium.

    2. Re:USPTO sucks at trademarks too it seems... by Dalcius · · Score: 1

      For a long time Interplay's trademark/slogan has been
      By Gamers, For Gamers.

      Similar and confusing lawsuit anyone?

      --
      ~Dalcius
      Rome wasn't burnt in a day.
    3. Re:USPTO sucks at trademarks too it seems... by Satan's+Librarian · · Score: 1

      Thank you! I knew I had seen it before in a game - I had mistakenly thought it was Gathering but didn't see it used, so I did a Google search and found a million others :)

  41. MoFo!?!?! by mackman · · Score: 1

    I seriously cannot even begin to trust a company who's lawfirm is MoFo.com. They might as well hire "I can't believe it's a lawfirm". At least then they'll be left with a briefcase full of newspaper shreddings.

    1. Re:MoFo!?!?! by Lehk228 · · Score: 1

      they should hire Leonard "J." Crabs instead, he is better than MoFo could ever be...

      --
      Snowden and Manning are heroes.
    2. Re:MoFo!?!?! by AndroidCat · · Score: 1

      Umm, you might want to do a little research on the firm of Morrison & Forester. (Assuming that's the MoFo involved.) They've even gone toe-to-toe with $cientology and came out with a technical win.

      --
      One line blog. I hear that they're called Twitters now.
    3. Re:MoFo!?!?! by phr2 · · Score: 1

      MoFo is an affectionate name given to Morrison and Forrester, a huge firm and one of the best in the country. They have over 1000 lawyers and have done a lot of kick-ass pro bono litigation for environmental law and even against the Church of Scientology, in addition to the usual corporate stuff. Believe me, everyone in the legal business knows exactly who they are, just like geeks know who HP is. They don't have to worry one bit about their domain name messing up their reputation.

    4. Re:MoFo!?!?! by Wtcher · · Score: 1

      Yay. I first heard of them - on Slashdot, even - when they sued a spammer and won. :) I can afford to respect a company who will sue a spammer. ;)

      --
      ----- Wtcher Dragon, UDIC
  42. From someone who lives in Sarasota.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Dear Friends,

    When I first heard about Infinium I was curious myself, especially since it's hq is my hometown. After reading the original article, I too drove down to longboat key and saw the supposed "hq" which indeed fit the description in the article. Shortly thereafter, they did acquire some very nice rental space on main st. I haven't been in the building, but rent is definitely not cheap in this area.

    The local paper has had a number of articles about Infinium and they might be of interest. You can find them at www.heraldtribune.com.

    I too looked for info on the founder, and his own resume which I found published on the Internet did indeed make him seem like a shady, take your money and run type. The fact that he lives on Longboat Key where the median family income is $107,983 shows that he's done pretty well. [wikipedia] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Longboat_Key%2C_Flori da

    1. Re:From someone who lives in Sarasota.... by AndroidCat · · Score: 2, Funny
      Dear Friends,

      Do I know you or do you just want to borrow money?

      --
      One line blog. I hear that they're called Twitters now.
  43. I second slashlaw by jason.mitchell · · Score: 1

    Maybe just SlashSCO will be fine. All this law stuff bores me.

  44. Re: Sad by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    "Bah! Who goes to E3 to see the cool stuff anyway. Its all about the babes, baby. Ahan!"

    Now that's pathetic...

  45. I worked for Tim Roberts at BIG by gserafini · · Score: 5, Interesting

    I worked for Tim Roberts at GlobalStreams under BIG. I was the webmaster for the only company that was purchased (rather than being created out of thin air) by BIG.

    My observation of the general business strategy that was followed at BIG could be summed up in one phrase: "Fake it 'til you make it." When we were working under the [BIG] umbrella, it was remarkable. At one point our company was instructed to hire people, not necessarily because we needed more people, but rather to increase headcount. They were still hiring until 1 or 2 weeks before BIG shut down.

    The often-expressed doubts surrounding this company and it's product (the name is completely telling) I believe are well founded. Simply reading the Phantom FAQ and their product specs should be instant signs to any observant individual.

    Step 1: Create website. (See their job postings for 3d renderers, Flash developers, etc...) Make it cool, fill it with the latest (OBVIOUS) buzzwords. DRM. Pay-per-play. Promise to deliver the cool dream application that might be possible.

    Step 2: Try to [maybe] actually deliver a product. Image is everything here, gotta keep the investors happy and the money flowing.

    Step 3: ???

    Step 4: Prof^H^H^H Take the money and spend it / run. Anyone who might think about investing in this company, or who even really hopes that what they say or sell might be worth spending some money on should do some research, due diligence and move on with their life.

    I often had a hard time working in an atmosphere where it was more important to seem successful than to _BE_ successful.

    BIG didn't work out. A lot of people quit perfectly good jobs to work with Tim and were pissed when it didn't work out. They spent a LOT of money. After that experience for some reason I REALLY wanted to work in an environment where, say for example, a real product was worked on to solve a real problem, that had real customers.

    Ah, the bitch of the reputation economy. Hope I don't get sued for sharing my personal experience and opinions.

    --
    Gabriel

  46. Can't the "Dec. Judge. Act" be used against SCO? by romcabrera · · Score: 1
    In a press release soon to be made public, lawyers representing KB Networks (the Bennett-founded entity that owns HardOCP), refers to the suit as one based on a legal statue commonly referred to as the "Declaratory Judgment Act." HardOCP lawyers explain the act as one that "permits a person or entity being threatened with lawsuits from another party to force the issue to be decided, rather than having to operate under a cloud of uncertainty and intimidation."

    Can't this be done against SCO????

  47. awesome by MoFoQ · · Score: 1

    it's nice to see someone bite back. Hopefully this will deter other a-holes from pulling the same bs as those a-holes tried to do with the beloved [H]ardOCP.

    now, if they can also mop up the SCO issue at the same time, that would really get everyone in the tech community bowing to the [H].

  48. Do Research Don't Believe Everything You See! by CKB2688 · · Score: 0, Troll

    Listen Before u take sides do your own research people can lie you know even Hard|OCP. I did mine and found lots of stuff [H] didn't mention or got wrong and even didn't talk to the right people to get there information. All I ask research than judge.

    1. Re:Do Research Don't Believe Everything You See! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      how about researching commas or punctuation or capitalization and try them out every now and again so people can read what you post without trying to unstring some giant line of text without having to say wtf and skip your post completely.

      Like this:

      Listen, before you take sides, do your own research. People can lie, even Hard|OCP. I researched and found things that Hard|OCP didn't mention or got wrong. They didn't even talk to the right people to get their information. All I ask: research then judge.

      kthxbye

  49. Suspicious by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Something I noticed that raises doubts over how serious Infinium really is... If you look at the tech specs for the machine it specifies an nVidia chip for the graphics and the nVidia logo is displayed on the site but if you look at nVidia's press section there's no press release mentioning any kind of relationship with Infinium. Take a look at the kind of press releases they do make and you'll see that they announce pretty much any partnership, even pretty minor stuff. Seems that if they had some kind of agreement to supply Infinium with any significant number of chips they'd have made an announcement.

    1. Re:Suspicious by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Microsoft doesn't mention anything either.

    2. Re:Suspicious by Remlik · · Score: 1

      IL could just be buying OEM cards in bulk from some distributer, and not directly from Nvidia.

      Not that I believe that but hey, it could happen.

      --
      Apple free since 1990!
  50. Deja vu by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Have you posted this same comment before? Whenever I see it -- if indeed I've seen it before -- I think to myself, "I don't get it."

    This time I read the replies, so now I get it. There evidently was a company called OCP in Robocop but I totally forgot about it.

    So no, I never did think about the Robocop organization. I think in the future when I see HardOCP, I will think back to this post, and how pointless it was (how pointless was it?).

  51. Listen up everyone.. by GonzoTech · · Score: 1

    To the company named "Sue."

    --
    "Snatching defeat from the mouth of victory on a daily basis."
  52. Can we use this DJ Act to sue SCO? by Attaturk · · Score: 2, Interesting

    But surely that's a good point. Quoting the article:

    In a press release soon to be made public, lawyers representing KB Networks (the Bennett-founded entity that owns HardOCP), refers to the suit as one based on a legal statue commonly referred to as the "Declaratory Judgment Act." HardOCP lawyers explain the act as one that "permits a person or entity being threatened with lawsuits from another party to force the issue to be decided, rather than having to operate under a cloud of uncertainty and intimidation."

    Could linux users use the same approach to sue SCO for threating them too??

    1. Re:Can we use this DJ Act to sue SCO? by the+arbiter · · Score: 1

      Yes, and someone (Red Hat, IBM, AutoZone) should. Why no one has is utterly beyond me.

      --
      Boycott everything - they're all trying to fuck you one way or another
    2. Re:Can we use this DJ Act to sue SCO? by Zeriel · · Score: 1

      No one has because any declaratory judgement would be contingent on the decision of the IBM/SCO case already being decided.

      Declaratory Judgements only work when the issues at hand are not already being decided in the courts--once someone actually sues one of the targets over the issue, it's pointless to file a DJ suit.

      Because DJ suits boil down to "They're threatening to sue me, and I want it decided once and for all rather than living with threats." If the judge can look at the DJ suit and say "this point is already being judged elsewhere" it can't go anywhere because it's already going, know what I'm saying?

      --
      "America has done some terrible things. But I know that Americans don't cheer when innocents die." -Dave Barry
  53. MOD PARENT UP! by AndrewWood · · Score: 1

    Thank you, thank you, for putting into words and lending the credibility of an insider to some things I've been wanting to post myself.

    In the IL thread last night, I invited people to have a laugh by simply reading anything and everything on IL's own websites. Any observant person should be able to read between the lines there.

    IL has had one product - an image, and an image created for them by 3rd parties at that! Their target market is investors, to whom they want to sell this image. At this point, I don't care how many "industry veterans" they become capable of hiring, or whether they do eventually bring a console to market. I don't doubt that their shady strategy could work, and call me spiteful, but to me that possibily is more offensive than simply peddling the exaggerated nothing in the first place.

  54. astroturfer? by rei_slashdot · · Score: 2, Funny

    Go away, Tim.

    1. Re:astroturfer? by CKB2688 · · Score: 1

      Just as I thought people are so dead set on not liking Infinium they won't even do research on them to get the facts.

    2. Re:astroturfer? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Very Nice. Care to enlighten us?

  55. "..will have.."?!? by PhoenixOne · · Score: 2, Interesting
    They said they "will have" a both at the 2003 GDC, E3, and even the "Xtream Dev Conf" (for the 50 people that showed up I guess ;)). I'm not ready to write them off 100%, but they are always "about to show" us something great but never do. It is hard to trust them.

    Maybe this will be the second coming of home entertainment, but until I see a dev machine with my own eyes (hey, I signed up as a developer over a year ago!) they are not worth my time.

    --
    Spell cheek you've failed me four the last thyme!
  56. Yes, mod parent up!! by TRINITE · · Score: 1

    This is the best comment on this thread so far.

  57. All the research you need by AndrewWood · · Score: 3, Insightful
    All the research you need can be found on Infinium's very own web sites. Read every press release, look at the site (design by 2advanced. Infinium can't even take credit for the cool flash, which is the only thing of "substance" in sight), read the comedy that is Tim's resume page, look at how they word everything, and read between the lines.

    I'm not going to post my play-by-play analysis, but suffice it to say, I agree with you about one thing. Anybody who's interested should indeed do their own research. (and have a few good laughs and amazed slaps of the forehead while they're at it)

  58. Infinium Stock by sandalwood · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Imagine you are some non-tech-savvy investor, and all you know about Infiniujm Labs is what you see here. Not so bad, right? So I think the reason Infinium is so intent on protecting its image is because of this fragile bubble they have built around the stock.

  59. phantom gaming network delivery system? by rei_slashdot · · Score: 1

    what was that old investigative news story about the guy with his magic broadband box who setup an elaborate scam that took in money?

    one demonstration was a connection across the river and the guy had rigged it on the other end?

    1. Re:phantom gaming network delivery system? by Rudeboy52 · · Score: 1

      I remember reading about that. I want to say that he actually ran a cable under the water and across the river. If I believe correctly, he was using a VCR inside the "computer" and had rigged the power cable so that it had a coax cable hidden inside it. I'll be damned if I can remember his name or a link to his "product.

      --
      ~Cone
  60. Discovery is gonna be fun by Facekhan · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Since among the many disputed statements in HARDOCP articles is whether the Phantom is vaporware, filing a suit is a great way to find out whether the thing actually exists. If Infinium challenges the statement that they don't really have a product, then they have to show that they do have a product and HARDOCP gets to see it.

  61. Hopefully ... by Poligraf · · Score: 1

    ... it won't be bundled with a legal threat like SCO software.

    --
    Tigers respect lions, elephants and hippos. Maggots respect no one. (C) S. Dovlatov
  62. Forgot few others by Poligraf · · Score: 1

    1) Rambus;
    2) Eolas and other "inventors";
    3) The biggest and baddest: http://www.triallawyersinc.com/html/part01.html

    --
    Tigers respect lions, elephants and hippos. Maggots respect no one. (C) S. Dovlatov
  63. 200 bln $ per annum by Poligraf · · Score: 1

    http://www.triallawyersinc.com/html/part01.html - the research on the subject.

    It is about 2% of the GDP and is estimated to cost people about 5% of all their wages.

    I know that the numbers are not exact because it is really hard to count this crap, but it is worth reading.

    Also, read a couple of my short articles (and don't judge bad grammar, English is not my first language):
    http://sqft87.pisem.net/tiger/victim.h tml
    http://sqft87.pisem.net/tiger/barbar.html

    --
    Tigers respect lions, elephants and hippos. Maggots respect no one. (C) S. Dovlatov
  64. Exactly ONE change is necessary by Poligraf · · Score: 1

    > So we should throw out 900 years of legal development because you don't like some of the people who file lawsuits?

    Read these:
    http://www.manhattan-institute.org/html/_w sj-fla_t obacco_jurors.htm
    http://www.reason.com/0301/fe.w o.courting.shtml

    Then you'll understand that it is the ability to do not only venue shopping, but also a jury shopping that is the real offender. I have read that it does not exist in the British law, and allows forming the most sympathetic jury possible.

    This is the real culprit behind companies caving in and coughing huge sums to settle.

    In my opinion, it directly undermines the democratic foundation of the entire jury trial system by allowing lawyers to create a "controllable subset" of the jury pool that reflects the population as a whole.

    I am not a lawyer, but is it possible that this practice is somehow unconstitutional and can be legally challenged and defeated? Can it be killed through the ballot initiatives that exist in about half of the states?

    --
    Tigers respect lions, elephants and hippos. Maggots respect no one. (C) S. Dovlatov
    1. Re:Exactly ONE change is necessary by nomadic · · Score: 1

      Venue shopping isn't allowed; you have to have a good (legal) reason for getting a case moved.

      And Reason and the Manhattan Institute are incredibly biased sources. I wouldn't trust them on this issue. They have a tendency to start with a conclusion then twist an argument into supporting it, instead of starting neutral and arriving at a conclusion in a more intellectually honest way.

    2. Re:Exactly ONE change is necessary by Poligraf · · Score: 1

      >Venue shopping isn't allowed; you have to have a good (legal) reason for getting a case moved.

      Oh yeah? Why the hell do we have counties that hear tons of cases on asbesto et al?

      >And Reason and the Manhattan Institute are incredibly biased sources. I wouldn't trust them on this issue.

      I am not Manhattan Institute, but I agree wholehartedly with their assesment of the tort field.

      I can say even more, as you could read from my articles.

      >They have a tendency to start with a conclusion then twist an argument into supporting it, instead of starting neutral and arriving at a conclusion in a more intellectually honest way.

      Say this to your friend Nader who has all of his ideas inherited from a base class of "All corporations are evil and exist only to screw people in every possible way".

      As for your argument, it is crap (honestly). How can one expect that someone who works as a researcher in a certain field for 20 years will write all of his works in a manner suitable for the "Product liability for dummies" series?

      Their work in the field brought them to certain conclusions, and they have a lot of data to confirm their conclusions and prove their point.

      And I don't think someone short of Nader-like paranoia can claim them to be too wrong.

      --
      Tigers respect lions, elephants and hippos. Maggots respect no one. (C) S. Dovlatov
    3. Re:Exactly ONE change is necessary by nomadic · · Score: 1

      Oh yeah? Why the hell do we have counties that hear tons of cases on asbesto et al?

      Because the plaintiffs' lawyers found a legal justification for doing so. Do you honestly think that the corporations they sue don't do the same exact thing?

      As for your argument, it is crap (honestly). How can one expect that someone who works as a researcher in a certain field for 20 years will write all of his works in a manner suitable for the "Product liability for dummies" series?

      I'm not sure exactly who you're talking about here, I think you lost control of your sentences. If you can name specific things about tort liability that you disagree, then bring them up.

      Say this to your friend Nader who has all of his ideas inherited from a base class of "All corporations are evil and exist only to screw people in every possible way".

      My friend Nader? Why do you assume I know him, or even agree with him?

    4. Re:Exactly ONE change is necessary by Poligraf · · Score: 1

      >Because the plaintiffs' lawyers found a legal justification for doing so. Do you honestly think that the corporations they sue don't do the same exact thing?

      What exactly is "a justification"? Isn't it an exercising the possibility to choose the most sympathetic place out of all possible?

      And don't forget, it is the defendant who need to spend extra money and effort to get the trial moved, and it is he who does not always succeed. Plaintiff enjoys the advantages that come with a "first strike".

      >I'm not sure exactly who you're talking about here, I think you lost control of your sentences.

      If YOU can't understand ME, it is MY problem? ;-)

      >If you can name specific things about tort liability that you disagree, then bring them up.

      1) "Jury shopping" - undemocratic (I already told about this).

      2) Punitive damages as a concept - it is just pure robbery, and who pays? The public does since corporation does not work for salary, it just transfers the extra costs (legal ones) to its customers - I mean ones that are not absorbed by its business insurance that spreads these payouts to all businesses (I told about this in the old thread, and you stopped answering).

      3) I hate the idea of a private sharks doing essentially what the state regulators are supposed to be doing - enforcing products quality. The percentage they suck for themselves is too high, the system's bang for the buck is too low.

      4) I hate what all of this crap does to people's psyche and mentality - some details are in my article about victims, others - some abuse the system in order to enrich themselves. Lawyers'a ability to form the dumbest jury (read my earlier links about Florida tobacco trial and California Chevrolet trial somewhere in this thread) allows for this abuse.

      >My friend Nader? Why do you assume I know him, or even agree with him?

      Nader is the trial lawyer disguised as human being; he is a PR front for the trial bar. This was what I meant.

      Many of your views are the way trial lawyers would like everyone to see the world. It (as well as previous altercation with you: http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=96895&threshol d=-1&commentsort=0&mode=thread&pid=8290221#8290404 ) makes me think you're a trial lawyer or at least a "victims' advocate" brainwashed by Naderites.

      --
      Tigers respect lions, elephants and hippos. Maggots respect no one. (C) S. Dovlatov
  65. ACs Home Address and Phone by Felinoid · · Score: 1

    Anonymous Coward
    1234 Anystreet
    Freecity, USA
    31337
    (555)555-5555

    On that being said. On the subject of shouting someone down: Yes I agree with it.
    On the subject of insulting: I disagree.
    On the subject of posting a persons home address etc: Harrasment targeting.

    But when your blatently misrepresenting the details yeah I'm all for shouting you down.
    The rest is totally out of line.

    --
    I don't actually exist.
  66. Another sighting by nertz_oi · · Score: 1

    here

    This is definitly the wave of the future, just not addressing the hard core gamer market since they all use PC's (actually a much smaller market then the consumer market). Good idea..

    Not only is he posting to message boards, but he's praising himself under a different name!. Priceless.

  67. Hey Tim, any stock recommendations? by nertz_oi · · Score: 1

    Of course he does.

    Its kinda funny that he has to recommend his own company on the Internet. I wonder when we'll see a 'bgates' recommending MSFT.

    Oh, and if anyone has any doubts that TWCBINC is really Tim Roberts...have a look.

  68. It's all about credibility. by Performer+Guy · · Score: 0, Flamebait

    The whole problem with this scenario is it's all about credibility. In order for Infinium to succeed they need to create a perception that they have momentum to get funding, developer support and console sales. Hard OCP attacking them on every piece of FUD they could come up with damaged their company. No it wasn't necessarily false but there was a lot of conjecture and innuendo. If you undermine the perception that Infinium is a credible business then you undermine their ability to do business. There's no denying that HardOCP has a burr up their ass on this one for no apparent reason other than the unbridled ego of Kyle.

    Everyone knows that this system as proposed isn't technically difficult, the only issue is momentum to get critical mass and funding until they reached profitability. It'll be much less likely to happen thanks to HardOCP's article.

    Rather than doing anyone a favour they've actually guaranteed that this will probably never happen and injured the current investors as they masquerade as helping them.

    There's a lot of excessive intimidation of web publishers, but this particular case doesn't exactly make me sympathetic towards HardOCP. Kyle Bennett setting out to do a mean spirited hatchet job on a startup company trying to pull off a hail mary play in the console market .... frankly I don't care about this one, let them stew.

    1. Re:It's all about credibility. by Performer+Guy · · Score: 1

      Looks like the HardOCP fanboys got me on this one. Flamebait? Do you idiots even know what flamebait is? Geeze.

  69. Is anyone surprised... by Walkiry · · Score: 3, Interesting

    that the Phantom forums have been shut down for a while now? I guess *someone* saw this one coming and decided to conveniently tell the boss it'd be a good idea to "upgrade to a better forum software" as soon as possible.

    --
    ---- Take the Space Quiz!
  70. Valve Steam anyone? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Infinium beleive their USP is their Phantom.net VPGN (Virtual Private Gaming Network) - surely Valve are working on something similar with Steam?

  71. Perfectly said by SoopahMan · · Score: 1

    And who knows how many other websites Infinium Labs or other companies under the control of this man have been sued for publishing less-than-glowing reviews? HardOCP has been brave enough to post the lawsuit on its website, and find justice in court. But it's very possible several websites have just received the notice, not understood it except to feel scared, and quietly taken articles down. Maybe HardOCP's fight will get noticed by those damaged sites and we'll have a more secure, unbiased press for it.

  72. Re: Sad by Alkaiser · · Score: 1

    Especially since there's been a huge drop-off in booth babe quality and quantity over the last 3 years. Some of the people last year had NO business being in the outfits they were wearing.

    --
    Netjak.com independent reviews of domestic & import video ga
  73. systems video card by Mathiau · · Score: 1

    They claim to make the most powerful gaming system and yet they ONLY use a NV36 video card...lol

    that is funny - that shows their level of creditbility and quality of their product right there!

    Anyways back to your regulary scheduled comments.