Slashdot Mirror
HardOCP Declares Win vs. Infinium Labs
Bill Bagel writes "Many of us have watched Infinium Labs' attempt to quash HardOCP's First Amendment right for the last year. HardOCP wrote this story on the Infinium Labs CEO, Tim Roberts, that was based on his own resume and some Google research. IL sued HardOCP, a home-based webpage business for $20M in Florida, and HardOCP fought back in a Federal Court in Texas for a declaratory judgment. HardOCP basically won when Infinium Labs finally gave up the fight citing great expenses involved in fighting the declaratory suit. The judge's order can be found here." The Cliff's Notes version can be found on WhereisPhantom.com.
I wonder how long it'll be before IL throws in the towel completely... probably not until they milk every last bit of money from their investors.
:)
Have fun watching their stock flipflop over the next few weeks as the pump&dump crowd has fun with it.
[an error occured while processing this directive]
Kudos to Kyle for standing up to the bullying tactics that seem to become more and more pervasive each year. Also, it is just absolutely astounding that IL would go after a site that caters news to a potential customer base easily in the tens of thousands for them. Guess they weren't planning on succeeding with their vaporous Phantom in the first place. ....unless it was to be the ultimate platform for the ultimate vapor-sequel, Duke Nukem....
Oh, and Will Eisner, who drew The Spirit died, after a magnificent career and giving so much. Seems like some could learn from such an example rather than pissing in their own coffee.
A feeling of having made the same mistake before: Deja Foobar
...you CHECK THE BLOODY REFERENCES when you invest in a startup. Who in their right MIND gave this guy money?
Hopefully, it says that people were smart enough NOT to given this loser their money.
The whole point of the HardOCP article was "based on the track record, this guy will take your money, blow it without producing anything of value, and skip out on the bankruptcy."
A coproration is basically treated as an individual in the eyes of the law.
In many ways, this makes sense--can you imagine if you individually had a right to free speech, but the New York Times did NOT?
Because it is physically impossible to put a corporation in prison for a couple of years, treating corporations as if they were individuals gives them all the rights of individuals, but not all the responsibilities of individuals. Corporations breaking the law do not face the same risk of punishment as individuals do. For them it's "Is this infraction worth the risk of a fine?", whereas for actual living, breathing people, the deterrent is "Is this infraction worth the risk of several years of prison?"
Don't label something "offtopic" unless you know the topic well enough to tell what's on topic.
If you read the letter at the bottom of the page, supposedly from Tim Roberts, he says (quoted from page), "Kevin and I discussed whether it made since for the company to continue pursuing this....".
If this is an exact duplicate, wouldn't you expect your CEO (boss) to have good grammar?
Since should be, "sense".
What a moron. Way to go HardOCP.
Alcohol & calculus don't mix. Never drink & derive.
"HardOCP basically won when Infinium Labs finally gave up the fight citing great expenses involved in fighting the declaratory suit"
Don't the people who submit the stories RTFA? I mean CRIPES. No, they didn't give up because of expenses, they gave up BECAUSE THEY DID NOT HAVE A CASE. RTFA! I mean GEEZ....
To wit:
"..does not constitute unfair competition under U.S.C 1125 or an unfair business practice, trade disparagement, trade libel, and tortious interference with contract under Texas law, and that plaintiffs' use of Infinium's trademarks from September 7 2003 through February 19,2004 in connection with the article does not constitute dilution or infringement of those marks or otherwise give rise to liability under federal or state law. Because defendants have ADMITTED (emphasis mine) that plaintiffs are entitled to declaratory relief, they move for judgement on the pleadings in favor of the plaintiffs pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. (Federal Rules for Civil Procedures) 12(c)."
I mean, c'mon...there's nothing about cost of litigation. It's all the Infinium being full of horse manure.
--
BMO
The legal concept of a corporation as a "person" which has Constitutional rights came from a Supreme Court decision, Santa Clara County v. Southern Pacific Railroad Company in 1886.
FYI, It only took me about three seconds to find this with a Google search. There's no excuse to spout uninformed nonsense when finding the facts and documenting them is so trivially easy.
Why is it that the proponents of "one nation under God" are so eager to get rid of "liberty and justice for all"?
This was not a David vs. Goliath battle as the story suggests. Infinium Labs is a pitifully small and weak company. HardOCP's original article made much of the fact that they didn't even have a storefront or office, and a quick glance at their financial info reveals a small business in a weak financial position. HardOCP may have been the "underdog" in the sense that they probably don't have as much legal experience, but with their very large readership, they do have a very strong base of moral (and potential financial) support, which evens things out a little.
The right side won, but this was not a case of a big powerful corporation trying to stomp on a beleaguered individual. So, while we should be pleased with the result, the importance of this win should not be exagerrated. You can bet that, had it been an ATI or NVidia making the threats, their demands would have been promply complied with. I wouldn't blame them for it, either, but the power imbalance that would lead to such a cave-in is the real issue, and this particular win does nothing to address that problem.
OK. You seem knowledgeable about this, and I"ve yet to see anyone expound on this further
Has there been any legal basis to challenge/uphold this interpretation? Or has the fact that it showed up in a Supreme Court decision more or less made it a permanent part of law?
Could one, perhaps, challenge the view the a corporation has constitutional rights? They don't vote or have drivers licences for example. Are their 'rights' defined in any way?
Lost at C:>. Found at C.
Infinium Labs basically has no money for attorney's fees or anything else since the last I heard, they had failed to get any additional investor funding. So I think throwing in the towel on the lawsuit is part of their endgame strategy. Don't be surprised if this is soon followed by Chapter 7 Bankruptcy following CES. Unless they get more money real soon, they are DEAD and the show is over. I think whatever they show at CES is their last chance. Though I still wonder if success was ever even an option.
To the making of books there is no end, so let's get started
Arthur Andersen. QED.