Jim Sterling in court.

[TrulyBritish]

I'm going to leave the option open of them actually having a case, in my mind. I highly doubt it though, but on the off-chance that they somehow win the Court Case, I'll respect that decision and probably assume there's something that DH knew about the situation that I didn't know that somehow made this litigation a good idea.

I'm not seeing it at the moment...but who knows.

They kind of do apparently. Digihom's main accusation is at an editorial Jim did in which he claimed that an artwork they were using in the promotional material for Galactic Hitman (I think it was that one, who knows with the 25-ish games they've churned out) was stolen from a DeviantArt page and uncredited. It then turned out the artwork was available on Shutterstock and he made a retraction correcting this, but apparently in Arizona you can still be sued for this.

 

[MHR]

Still, proving that resulted in damages is impossible. They would have to prove that that one error caused them to lose all their reputation, credibility, and profits unjustly...

They had already lost all their reputation justly.

 

[rcs619]

Still, proving that resulted in damages is impossible. They would have to prove that that one error caused them to lose all their reputation, credibility, and profits unjustly...

They had already lost all their reputation justly.

Pretty much. Unless it's especially egregious I think you have to factor in intent as well. Journalists make mistakes all the time in their articles and news coverage, but they rarely get sued for slander/libel. They just retract the mistake, publicly acknowledge it and everyone goes on their way. If every journalist could get sued for the tiniest mistake, they'd all get sued constantly.

Digital homicide is using a legal technicality to try and sue over a non-issue. The *only* thing they have even the tiniest legal case over is the art thing. Everything else about Jim "dragging their names through the mud", "comparing them to the wet bandits from Home Alone" and "ordering his fans to harass them" doesn't even have a chance. They're just throwing it all in together and hoping something sticks while they've already got him in court.

I don't see any way they can *prove* that one mistaken comment amount a piece of artwork did 2 million dollars worth of damages to their brand, or is worth 9 million dollars in emotional and punitive damages. Their shoddy products and Jim's rightful coverage of those products (and DH's shady business tactics) are what destroyed their brand, and *that* is all protected under fair use and criticism laws.

I hate to tell them, but not all press is always good press. I don't know if they're just too prideful, or stupid to realize what they're doing to their brand. If they would have never falsely-DMCA'ed Jim, and stopped constantly escalating things, literally no one would care about their shitty studio.

 

[PainInTheAssInternet]

Something just occurred to me. Not sure if it's actually the case, though.

No one, not even Digital Homicide, disputes that DH placed a DMCA claim against Sterling's channel. So if Sterling is able to prove that the claim was filed under false pretences (which DH is doing themselves, really), what does that do for the case? They didn't cause any monetary damage, but they did try to.

 

[marioandsonic]

Jim Sterling is certainly a polarizing figure, and I do have my grievances with him.

That said, I really don't see the developers winning this case, and I certainly pray that they don't.

Sure, people don't like Jim, and some even want him to be knocked down a few pegs. But this all started just because Jim said some terrible things about this dev's games (and rightly so). If they win this case, that is a VERY dangerous slippery slope, and could set a precedent that all critics could be sued by makers of video games, movies, music, etc., just for giving a bad review.

 

[FalloutJack]

Game developers now are suing critics...

That's shameful.

You know, if this were true, DH should take a page from Konami and not bother. Jim invented a meme that overtly says "Fuck Konami", and then proceeds to ream the hell out of them. Why would it work for a small-timer if the bigwigs have more and better reasons to be pissed, and they don't do anything?

I can only assume that's because Konami's legal team consists of actual lawyers, while DH's is presumably an ambulance chaser who is either not too particularly bright or doesn't give a fuck and just wants to make some easy money off these schmucks' (hopefully) hopeless case.

You're right. I'm giving common sense to someone who has none. My apologies.

 

[Smooth Operator]

Well I don't particularly care about either party, but the most amusing piece in all this is they are not only trying to silence the exposure of their borderline to plain illegal crap, they are asking the public to fund their lawsuit in order to silence a guy who had the guts to tell people what is going on...
Amazing stuff, this really is a prime case of Judge Judy, possibly Judge Dredd.

 

[Musou Tensei]

Double standards are kinda garbage, eh?

 

[asinann]

They actually don't have a leg to stand on if they don't have some kind of location in the state they are suing. Anyone they sue could have it moved to another state, like their home state.

 

[asinann]

They actually don't have a leg to stand on if they don't have some kind of location in the state they are suing. Anyone they sue could have it moved to another state, like their home state.

 

[circularlogic88]

I think a lot of people here are under the impression that you need to have proof beyond reasonable doubt that Jim caused anything DigiHom are claiming he did to them. Reasonable doubt only applies to criminal cases. Civil cases need much less to "win" in favor of DigiHom. Best example I can give is OJ Simpson, he won his criminal court case, but he was savaged in civil court.

 

[Silentpony_v1legacy]

You know what? As a goof, lets do it. Lets all donate to the GoFundMe page and get DH a lawyer. A good one. Let's swan dive directly into this and see how deep it goes!

I want this to go to the top. To the Supreme Court. I want to see Jim Sterling in a red suit telling Ruth Bader Ginsburg how he jizzes on pogs and James how its unfair to call his games shit because its not actual fecal matter and that its defamation of character to say DH put literal human waste on Steam.

Also I want to see what dog John Oliver would use for Jim Sterling in his Fake Paws Supreme Court. Oh please let it be Bartleby! That would totally make my day!

 

[BrawlMan]

Yeah, I don't see this going to court. And even if it did, Jim Sterling would win this right out of the gate. DH has pretty much self incriminated themselves multiples times. There are videos, articles, and other websites that have mountains of evidence of their wrong doings. If anything, I would not be surprised if Jim was allowed to counter sue DH in return. If that happens, they would be run out of business for good.

 

[BoogieManFL]

Well their games are shit and they know what they are doing is shit. Not surprised they'd stoop to this level for an attempt at another quick buck that they didn't earn or deserve in any way.

 

[elvor0]

Double standards are kinda garbage, eh?

Who's doing double standards here? You might be, with your complaints about censorship and fining buggy developers, noone else is.

 

[Politrukk]

On the placement note:

Isn't this topic rather a game industry discussion topic?

I mean it would be far too much credit to call this developer a fully fledged developer but still.

 

[Politrukk]

You know what? As a goof, lets do it. Lets all donate to the GoFundMe page and get DH a lawyer. A good one. Let's swan dive directly into this and see how deep it goes!

I want this to go to the top. To the Supreme Court. I want to see Jim Sterling in a red suit telling Ruth Bader Ginsburg how he jizzes on pogs and James how its unfair to call his games shit because its not actual fecal matter and that its defamation of character to say DH put literal human waste on Steam.

Also I want to see what dog John Oliver would use for Jim Sterling in his Fake Paws Supreme Court. Oh please let it be Bartleby! That would totally make my day!

The higher up this goes, the bigger the problem becomes, the point being that Jim loses an advantage because cases involving cyberabuse will be faced with dated laws and lawmakers who are going to judge on the case.

If we're cutting the entire internet thing and take it from an old perspective Jim might very well lose on some charges.

 

[KaraFang]

I recall that when the Digi incident had happened, Jim mentioned on one of his you tube play videos that in addition to talking to youtube about the media copyright system issues, he had also discussed a "legal" issue with YouTube's lawyer team and they were apparently happy to back him about something. I feel it may be this but we don't know.

I suppose it's a wait and see.

 

[SweetShark]

I decided today to read about this drama.
In the mean time I discoveried a Transcript of the discussion Jim and DigiHom had in the past for the people who don't want to listen the Podcast:

http://www.scribd.com/doc/270508471/Transcript