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.

12 of 234 comments (clear)

  1. What does this say about... by samdu · · Score: 5, Interesting

    ...the pockets of Infinium? Surely a "company" that's preparing to "release" a new "game system" should have enough "money" in the bank to fight a legal battle like this.

  2. What about lawyer's fees? by Average_Joe_Sixpack · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Even when you win a decision, you still lose because you have to pay thousands to a lawyer for defense. Is it possible for HardOCP to countersue to recoup those fees?

  3. Rights? by dcw3 · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Can someone please explain to me why corporations are afforded constitutional rights? Was that really the intention of the framers? I was under the impression that rights were for individuals, not companies. Obviously, IANAL, so please correct me if I'm misguided.

    --
    Just another day in Paradise
    1. Re:Rights? by AaronW · · Score: 2, Interesting

      It's also why you'll never see a corporation admit guilt. By not admitting guilt, whenever they pay a fine they can deduct it from their taxes. Talk about corrupt.

      --
      This post is encrypted twice with ROT-13. Documenting or attempting to crack this encryption is illegal.
  4. Re:Nothing; now it's news! by ViperG · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Yeah I agree it's not a big deal. But HardOCP was also proving the point that Tim Roberts, is a con-artist. Remember Media Fusion anyone? The ability to send internet packets over the magnetic waves of the power lines? The guy that started Media Fusion, used advanced technical jargon, and his charsima, to make people invest in a technology that did not exist, but he sounded like he could do it, so investors invested. So all these poor people, heh, not really poor, but they get con'd into investing millions of dollars, for whatever reasons they are investing (more for own profit, of course) into someone, that is lieing straight to their face, and really just going to steal their money. It happens all the time. Con-artists are everywhere. But this guy Tim Roberts, sounds like he's not just con'n the investors, but the whole world, making us all believe in the PHANTOM (key word) gaming console. Of course, he might really be building one, or, he might be a con-artist. And all while this is happening, he's gonna get another 10 mill from some smhuck, and it's not going to Infinium Labs, but right to HIS backaccount. And there is nothing we can do about it. Question is, should we care. It's a moral issue. HardOCP see's it, and saw Tim Roberts, as a obvious target, someone who they could go after and get. Most con-artists, you can't really catch. But remember, this can all be smoke and mirrors, because if the Phantom gaming console does come out, then it's a different story all together.

    --
    Black Sky
    2D Elite Inspired Game
  5. Re:Controllers by Schigolch · · Score: 2, Interesting

    They've already come up with this; considered by many to be the only redeeming idea or product IL has produced. And I believe IL has explicitly stated they won't distribute it without the unit.

  6. Re:Judge's signature by Class+Act+Dynamo · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Well, it actually appears that he was writing "J. Kaplan", but that does not explain all the u's. Maybe it's not a bunch of u's but a really large 'n' at the end of his name. I remember once there a news case about a man sentenced to death row who appealed because the judge put a smiley face in one of the o's in his name. The arguement was that the levity was inappropriate under the circumstances and therefore, the sentence should be commuted to life. The appeal failed. The judge's explanation was that he had always done it and how it had something to do with faith in God or something of that effect. I don't have a source to site on this story as it has been a long time since I read it (long time as in pre-me-having-internet)

    --
    My other computer is a Jacquard loom.
  7. But it's an attractive concept by gbulmash · · Score: 4, Interesting
    What's interesting to me in all this is that the console is an attractive concept. Roberts did his market research and crafted, if nothing else, a set of specs that got techies, gamers, and investors excited.

    It wasn't Roomba, iBot, and XBox 8 all rolled up in one. It was a feature set that got a certain subset of the population excited while having the technical underpinnings to make it possible that it could see the light of day at a reasonable price point.

    Call him a con-man or a snake oil salesman if you will, but give him some props for being able to identify the pavlovian triggers that have suckered investors into believing his concepts had merit over and over again. - Greg

  8. This is what happens when you fight by www.sorehands.com · · Score: 2, Interesting

    This is what happens when you fight instead of caving into a bully. Mattel tries the same sort of thing, and they have been made to pay over $1M. The RIAA tried that with Professor Felton, they caved, and their defense to the declaratory judgment is that 'we didn't mean it, when we threatended'.

  9. Re:Judge's signature by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting

    This is a common habit, I've seen it amongst natives of Central America; the signature is made unique by using a certain number, arrangement, or pattern of loops so that it can't be forged by someone who only casually saw another copy of the signature.

  10. Stock Splits? by digitalamish · · Score: 2, Interesting

    If you look at the yahoo link and show the past 1 year of trading you should see that the stock has split, TWICE! The first one was last Jan, a 5 for 1 split, and the second was May, a 4 for 1 split. And the stock has never gone over $2.50. So, even though the price is low, someone (hmmm, wonder who?) is sitting on 20x the stock they had last year. My guess is that after the next 'big announcement' about the product, someone will resign, then take the money and run.

  11. Re:Kyle and lawsuits by mwood · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Yeah, the first thing that leaped out at me was, "a *home-based business* beat out a sizable corporation by *costing the corporation too much*?" That's someone to remember.