Futuremark Corporation Takes on [H]ardOCP

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Futuremark Corporation Takes on [H]ardOCP

Posted by Zonk on Saturday October 9, 2004 @05:18AM from the please-stop-kicking-the-puppy dept.

RichM writes "After the ridiculous lawsuit by Infinium Labs against [H]ardOCP, companies appear to be queuing up to put the boot in. Next up, we have the Futuremark Corporation who apparently objected to the opinion that 3DMark2005 "sucked". The Vice President of Marketing for Futuremark exchanged a series of emails with Kyle Bennett, [H]ardOCP Editor, who dutifully posted the entire conversation to the front page of the site."

18 comments

Min score:

Reason:

Sort:

this is old news by doofusclam · 2004-10-09 05:20 · Score: 2, Informative

The guy in question from Futuremark has already apologised for it.
1. Re:this is old news by Anonymous Coward · 2004-10-09 05:32 · Score: 1, Insightful
  
  You don't actually expect a slashdot editor to do one moment of research or fact-checking before posting a story, do you?
2. Re:this is old news by Anonymous Coward · 2004-10-09 08:48 · Score: 0
  
  I wouldn't even expect the editors to click the link to the fucking article.
3. Re:this is old news by RichM · 2004-10-09 13:46 · Score: 1
  
  I know, I submitted this days ago when the news broke but the editors took too long in posting it...
Futuremark has already apologed by GoofyBoy · 2004-10-09 05:24 · Score: 5, Informative

http://www.hardforum.com/showpost.php?p=1026710094 &postcount=545

Thank you slashdot editors for checking your facts!

--
The surprise isn't how often we make bad choices; the surprise is how seldom they defeat us.
1. Re:Futuremark has already apologed by BrookHarty · 2004-10-09 05:44 · Score: 1, Insightful
  
  Thats Tero Sarkkinen from Future remark's appology. But I noticed HardOCP also removed the "Sucked" part from the main page.
  
  How about a little professional posting from companies, might be a good step to avoid all the "DRAMA".
2. Re:Futuremark has already apologed by Down8 · 2004-10-09 07:21 · Score: 2, Interesting
  
  HardOCP has always been presented as Kyle & Co.'s opinions on the hardware/software comunity. If it suddenly got 'professional', it wouldn't be the same site, and it would lose readership. You're way off-mark on this one.
  
  -bZj
  
  --
  .sig
3. Re:Futuremark has already apologed by BrookHarty · 2004-10-09 10:01 · Score: 1
  
  HardOCP has always been presented as Kyle & Co.'s opinions on the hardware/software comunity. If it suddenly got 'professional', it wouldn't be the same site, and it would lose readership. You're way off-mark on this one.
  
  Strange since Kyle has news articles published in magazines, does guest radio spots, tv spots, and is branching out in other businesses.
  
  Maybe one time it was one guys blog, its alot more now.
4. Re:Futuremark has already apologed by Down8 · 2004-10-09 21:03 · Score: 1
  
  Only newbs would call anything started before 2002 a 'blog'. He runs a hardware review/news aggregation site - no more, no less.
  
  The fact that he has branched out should in no way change the original intent of HardOCP.com.
  
  -bZj
  
  --
  .sig
5. Re:Futuremark has already apologed by Anonymous Coward · 2004-10-10 05:56 · Score: 0
  
  Although I agree with you that "blog" is the incorrect word, I wouldn't call someone with a 4 digi and nearly 2000 posts a newb, noob. j/k
  
  Your website sounds interesting. I could really go for a righteous hug after a weekend of heavy alcohol abuse. Do the huggers have big titties?
please please please add STORY MODDING !!!! by kayen_telva · 2004-10-09 05:27 · Score: 2, Insightful

this was days ago and futuremark already apologized and withdrew their statements.
It's about time there was online accountability. by Anton+Anatopopov · 2004-10-09 06:48 · Score: 1

If I said someone's product sucked on TV without justification I could be sued. Why should people be allowed to hide behind online anonymity? Libel is Libel whether or not it occurs online, it could be even more damaging too, since people believe what they read on websites in an almost totally uncritical way.
Re:It's about time there was online accountability by Down8 · 2004-10-09 07:19 · Score: 1

There was no anonymity involved. HardOCP is run by Kyle, and he said therse things on his front page.

And 'justifying' the word 'sucked' is near impossible, since, unless you're talking abotu a suction device, it's obviously an opinion.

-bZj

--
.sig
Re:It's about time there was online accountability by Guspaz · 2004-10-09 11:46 · Score: 1

Exactly, and if Kyle's opinion is that a product is not good, or "sucks", then as I understand it that's free speech for you.
Re:It's about time there was online accountability by Anton+Anatopopov · 2004-10-09 13:06 · Score: 1

What, even if the product does not actually suck?
Re:It's about time there was online accountability by base3 · 2004-10-09 14:25 · Score: 1

Use of the word "suck" is obviously an expression of an opinion, not fact, and can't possibly be libelous. Now if they were to have made up benchmark results, or, perhaps said that the owner of the company has to kill a dog to have an orgasm, then the company might have a libel case.

--
One CPU cycle wasted on digital restrictions management is ONE TOO MANY.
Re:It's about time there was online accountability by Guspaz · 2004-10-10 03:01 · Score: 1

And in the case of the dog-orgasm, the president joked about it, acting as if it were true. Once he's done that, I don't think it's libelous anymore, since he's said publicly that it's true, even if he was joking :p
Re:It's about time there was online accountability by base3 · 2004-10-10 03:17 · Score: 1

Yeah, you're right, but I couldn't resist the reference :).

--
One CPU cycle wasted on digital restrictions management is ONE TOO MANY.