Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

 Frazzled wrote:

 MajorTom11 wrote:
I tend to agree with that Emp... Romeo doesn't do himself any favors writing stuff like that, that's for sure, but it isn't fair to discount all the positive things he does just because you don't like him.

He is definitely a polarizing figure in the hobby, but it has become 'en vogue' to go absolutely nuts on him more than anyone else that I know of. Even Ward, Kirby and Mandelbaum don't get the level of vitriol and aggression Romeo does.

This makes it very difficult for threads on him to exist here as they all seem to very rapidly get to the point where rule #1 is irretrievably out the window. I hope that doesn't happen here. His actions and policies can be discussed without condemning him without reservation as 100% no good people.

Much angst over a box maker. Pistol cases superior...figure cases inferior!

No one calls Soundwave unchrasimatic!


I read the original BoK article and that molehill was dripping with growth hormone to get that blown out of proportion. You'd have thought they were breaking Watergate 2.0. A few internet toughguy posts do not a scandal make.

 Alfndrate wrote:

 Kanluwen wrote:

 Absolutionis wrote:
As a curiosity, does anyone have the original pre-edited recording of the controversial O-12 Podcast that has since been removed?

Yes.

Would you like a transcript of it?

Wouldn't mind the actual podcast, but a transcript would be nice too

Likewise, and thank you.

Typing up a transcript now. For the most part, it's really not that bad and makes you realize that while Romeo certainly could have handled it better--it mostly comes from being frustrated over how nitpicky people were being.

Is the file too big to upload elsewhere?

It's not so much that it's "too big", but rather that I do not really have anywhere to upload it to.

If you have somewhere to upload it to; I'd be okay with sending it as an email.

 Absolutionis wrote:
Is the file too big to upload elsewhere?

Kanluwen doesn't certainly can't host it without the shows permission.

 kronk wrote:

 Absolutionis wrote:
Is the file too big to upload elsewhere?

Kanluwen doesn't certainly can't host it without the shows permission.

Definitely another factor preventing me from doing it.

Its actually really good and I make sure to listen to every episode.

Oh Jeez.

"I think I read somewhere once..."
"I heard he was the devil..."
"Maybe he said this one..."
"After reading your fantasy I'm never buying BattleFoam"
"He made a joke comment about punching someone on his porch so he's clearly a bad man"

People get a grip.

BattleFoam is an awesom product. Fact.
Romeo is human like the rest of us and gets hurt when people flat out lie about him. Fact.
40kRadio is a bunch of guys talking about 40k like many of us do over a pint or two so you need to have your big boy pants on. Fact.
BoK likes to write sensationalist rumours and went too far this time and finally someone is bringing him to task. Fact.

Will Romeo win? Who knows with a legal system like we have today but I sure hope so, he deserves to.

The short of it is (as corroborated by everyone who has met the guy), Romeo is massively approachable and as he said just get on Skype and talk to the guy. He WILL talk to every single one of you. Until you have done so don't hide behind a false Internet persona scared of the boogy man who punches people on his porch! Seriously talk to him and make your own decisions. At the very least he is doing POSITIVE things for the community as opposed to snide side swiping and undermining the hobby many of us love.

As for the legal case... Again I think all of us can name a number of legal cases which have not gone the right way as many whic have. Read the BoK website and can you honestly say you would be happy if his vitriol was directed at you? Romeo is taking a stand which many of us couldn't afford to.

If anything we should be building a donations fund to help Romeo as he is not getting free legal cover unlike Mr Hayden.

MickeyP2K wrote:

BattleFoam is an awesom product. Fact.

BattleFoam killed my grandmother. Fact.

 Lansirill wrote:

MickeyP2K wrote:

BattleFoam is an awesom product. Fact.

BattleFoam killed my grandmother. Fact.

Yeah, I hear it's pretty sturdy.

I don't know if I'd call it "awesome", really. It's pretty good, but it feels awful pricey for what it is. As far as I'm concerned Sabol is just about right as far as price:quality ratio goes. It does the job and leaves you with extra cash to buy more models. I'd still like to get Battlefoam (I do have the Space Hulk trays but that's it), but I don't quite have the money to burn, and if I do I'd rather buy more models...which I'll regret because I can't transport them all.

As far as the lawsuit, it feels kinda pointless suing BoK. I get why Romeo doesn't like it, but I think it would have been better for business if he just quietly refuted whatever claims he was making and leave it at that. Imagine how dickish BoK would look if the guy who was supposedly wronged by Romeo just came out himself and said "No, that's not how it happened...", like he supposedly already did, and set the record straight without Romeo having to drag the whole thing to court. People would just shrug it off as BoK doing what BoK does (which from what I can tell isn't much better than blatant gak-stirring) and I doubt it would have done much harm at all to Romeo/Battlefoam in the end.

MicketP2K makes a convincing point.

I wish Romeo would have had TastyTaste on his podcast and have them settle this on 'net radio.

It would have been:
1) Great to listen too
2) Provided less $$$ to lawyers
3) Harken back to more honorable times
4) Podcast of the year

MickeyP2K wrote:
Oh Jeez.

"I think I read somewhere once..."
"I heard he was the devil..."
"Maybe he said this one..."
"After reading your fantasy I'm never buying BattleFoam"
"He made a joke comment about punching someone on his porch so he's clearly a bad man"

People get a grip.

BattleFoam is an awesom product. Fact.
Romeo is human like the rest of us and gets hurt when people flat out lie about him. Fact.
40kRadio is a bunch of guys talking about 40k like many of us do over a pint or two so you need to have your big boy pants on. Fact.
BoK likes to write sensationalist rumours and went too far this time and finally someone is bringing him to task. Fact.

Will Romeo win? Who knows with a legal system like we have today but I sure hope so, he deserves to.

The short of it is (as corroborated by everyone who has met the guy), Romeo is massively approachable and as he said just get on Skype and talk to the guy. He WILL talk to every single one of you. Until you have done so don't hide behind a false Internet persona scared of the boogy man who punches people on his porch! Seriously talk to him and make your own decisions. At the very least he is doing POSITIVE things for the community as opposed to snide side swiping and undermining the hobby many of us love.

As for the legal case... Again I think all of us can name a number of legal cases which have not gone the right way as many whic have. Read the BoK website and can you honestly say you would be happy if his vitriol was directed at you? Romeo is taking a stand which many of us couldn't afford to.

If anything we should be building a donations fund to help Romeo as he is not getting free legal cover unlike Mr Hayden.

Maybe you were brought up to think that threatening people with physical violence is an appropriate response to people critiquing something you've made, but some of us still think that's pathetic. And "you're a stalker who follows me around sniffing my panties, I dare you to say that to my face, by the way I know people who're looking for you in RL so watch your back" is not a joke, it's vitriolic dross.

As for how awesome a dude he is; whatever. I've known plenty of people who're "awesome dudes", great fun to talk to, and as friendly as anyone could be, right up until the moment they decide they don't like something you've said or done, and then they turn into the biggest d-bags imaginable. Building a "nice guy" persona isn't difficult, it's how people behave in difficult circumstances that tells you about their character.

Topic, folks.

Edit: Perhaps I was insufficiently clear. The OT digressions do not continue past this point. OT posts will be (and have been) deleted.

Yea yea its my first post, I've lurked long enough. No i am not some shell of someone else pretending to be someone else.

Now I've listened to 40kradio for a long time and have been a member since the first few shows when Spencer ran it(Probably won't be much longer). That said I don't support any of this at all. I've met Romeo a few times at adepticon and its all about moving product, so I can't say I know him outside of pitching sales. I've listened to the recent show with his take on the matter, and thanks the the OP listened via the 11th company podcast. I don't think either lend him any help and made me feel like BoK should win. The actions in different matters won't help either. The infinity blow up was minor compared to his against MLB with his bat fiasco. Its an interesting read. As for Arizona vs California to hear the case, I feel it should remain in Cali. I see no reason for it to be moved to Arizona other then to try and skirt the anti-SLAPP if i am reading into this right.

To me it comes down to Bully vs Bully and don't really care who wins or loses. The result is just gonna further someones hate towards the other regardless.

Surely that's the best reason to fight this so that we can hopefully give others the courage to fight the hate mongers.

Any company at a convention that is there to sell product. If thy are not then they are clearly not business people and I doubt they will be around in a decade or so like like the larger companies like Mantic, Battlefront, KR, who are also about selling product because they understand how to make a business work. And yes they 'push' product like anyone else because that's the point (anyone at Salute this year will corroborate that).

Charity is awesome but it doesn't keep food on your employees families tables.

For me it's about standing up for what's right even if that makes me unpopular because I'm not following the crowd or people do not know all the details of what goes on behind the scenes. That's why I use the same forum name whichever forum I am on. Everyone is entitled to their opinion but personally I am not afraid to account for my words and actions wherever I post.

MickeyP2K wrote:
Surely that's the best reason to fight this so that we can hopefully give others the courage to fight the hate mongers.
...
For me it's about standing up for what's right ....

Hi Mickey, you seem to have very strong opinions on this. Do you have any information on the case, such as what was said in the article, info on what actually happened in the incidences described in the article, or other info that has persuaded you to take such a strong view?

Yes i did read the article at the time and I know Romeo personally and all the guys who were actually present at the events in question.

Basically some of the events had not only staff but also freebootaz present so we know exactly what was said or more importantly, not said and not done.

The trick here is exactly as Romeo as many others have said this guy knows he is posting rumours at best and 'snazzing' it up to be sensational (not considering the damage he may do to people's families and reputations). There is a reason the tabloids in the UK sell well and Mr Haydon is just doing the same thing. The tabloids get sued and may have to pay out but that's their business model. Mr Hayden sadly never built that into his hence he still has a day job and is now trying to claim 'freedom of speech' but freedom of speech does not allow you to publish malicious, business damaging lies.

So the only part of the article that you have info on is the prize support instance? Were you at the event and witnessed this or is your info from Romeo and/or his friends?

Do you have info on any of the other instances in the article? To me the prize support instance isn't as "defamatory" as some of the others.

The point is I am close friends with a number of the guys who were there and have a good relationship with the others (albeit not as close). So I can either take their word or the word of a known 'sensationalist'.

If only one element is a lie by Mr Hayden then he is totally at fault because he is claiming his whole article is 100% true.

Therefore I think it's fair to say if just one element can be proven false there's a good chance the rest will be too.

I do see where you are heading and you are clearly very clever my good fellow but its turtles all the way down.

Nope, nothing clever about it. Just seeing if you had actual first-hand info and not something that you heard from a guy who heard from another guy.

I believe that a few of the instances in the article to be absolutely true. Does that mean I infer that everything to be true. Not at all. I'm sure at least some of the BoK article is "I heard from a guy, who heard from another guy, who was there". Poor journalism, yes ... full defamation, probably not.

Sorry you misconstrue my words into I heard from a guy who hear from another guy. I'll keep it real short and to the point:

The guys who are providing first hand evidence and written statements were there and heard the whole thing. They are my buddies as well as Romeo.

What I'm saying is not "I read a few things and believe them to be true". I'm saying I believe a number of people who all have the same story and do not have a track record of making things up as opposed to a single guy who has a track record for sensationalising things at best.

Add to that all my experiences of Roneo are of him as a genuinely nice guy who is trying to do positive things for the gaming community rather than using hate and bile to try to make a little bit on money on the side of a day job.

I'm sure if you talk to him on Skype you will find the same to e true. In fact I would suggest you talk to his directly before attempting to twist others words.

I think I've said my piece. Unless there is any further fantasy anyone would like to discuss I'll apologise to the local mods but I feel such character assassination attempts deserve a counter from people who actually know the target. Pick up the phone and speak to the guy. He has offered it to every single one of you.

To hide behind a keyboard and continue to fire shots is just... Well I'm sure everyone can come up with a suitable phrase.

All I can suggest for us the gamin community is do not be sheep just following the crowd. Have the strength to stand up and ask the questions of those more vocal elements. The Internet seems to be generating a voice for people with no intention of furthering the hobby many of us love.

Denounce them, shun them or at least question them an we will have a stronger community for it.

And apologies for iPhone predictive text

But how about the O-12 Infinity breakdown? That still stands as highly unprofessional at best, and anyone would have a hard time denying it is untrue. Correct me if I'm wrong, but I think that's one of the main points being tackled in said article?

Iirc one of his key gripes was that Romeo was the owner of Wild West Exodus and he was specifically trying to stop people signing up to the kickstarter. Overall the diatribe was trying to defame Romeos businesses buy making a number of accusations. That was his apparent intention.

In all honesty I've not read the Infinity forum but I'm sure we've all had moments in forums where temper has gotten the better of us. That doesn't make us evil just passionate.

The point here is whether you agree with someone's actions or not that does not give someone the right to then take fantasies and try to spin them up as truth to damage someone's business, reputation, their employees and their employees livelihoods.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Mods btw please let me know if you need this back and fourth to stop but while there are questions or negative views I only feel it only fair to provide balance.

I am very happy to discuss offline if you prefer, you have my email or can contact me via Yakface who will be able to get my contact details from Romeo, or I think he may still be a member of our forum.

That'll do, I think. The point of this thread is not to discuss people's impressions, but to discuss the pending litigation & facts directly related to it. Given that the actual text of the post that was removed is not available, there is no reason to get into a protracted discussion of what it might have said.

MickeyP2K wrote:The point is I am close friends with a number of the guys who were there and have a good relationship with the others (albeit not as close). So I can either take their word or the word of a known 'sensationalist'.

If only one element is a lie by Mr Hayden then he is totally at fault because he is claiming his whole article is 100% true.

MickeyP2K wrote:

All I can suggest for us the gamin community is do not be sheep just following the crowd. Have the strength to stand up and ask the questions of those more vocal elements. The Internet seems to be generating a voice for people with no intention of furthering the hobby many of us love.

I'd be happy to read Mr. Filip's Reply and Counter Claims if he wants to get his message out. He should post them up somewhere. If he's worried about basically republishing the blog post (presumably it is quoted in the filings) he could always redact the quoted portions.

Who is this Jane Doe he's suing for instance?

I have a few questions for the legally adept folks...

How well do signed affidavits hold up if they come from people who you have close relationships with (family or friends)? Do outsider affidavits carry more weight? Do they take into account evidence of previous inauthentic affidavits in other cases, such as what the judge warned against with "Jim Kavourias" in the Battlefoam vs. Outrider case?
http://ia700309.us.archive.org/2/items/gov.uscourts.nhd.35017/gov.uscourts.nhd.35017.9.0.pdf


Also, at what point does legal actions, such as C&Ds, or frivolous suing, become harassment and an Injunction Against Harassment can be filed?

carboncopy wrote:
I have a few questions for the legally adept folks...

How well do signed affidavits hold up if they come from people who you have close relationships with (family or friends)? Do outsider affidavits carry more weight?

Also, at what point does legal actions, such as C&Ds, or frivolous suing, become harassment and an Injunction Against Harassment can be filed?

Re affidavits: A lot of affidavits are going to be sworn by people with close personal relationships to either the plaintiff or the defendant. Usually your friends / family / or business associates are going to be the ones who saw what happened, or have knowledge about the dispute. Totally normal.

Usually if there is a close relationship, you'd be upfront about it - most of the time you begin establishing who the person is, where they live, their job, their relationship to the case etc... Concealing an interest is where you would see the finder of fact getting suspicious (failing to mention you were business partners, or someone was your brother etc..).

There are usually procedures for cross examining on an affidavit, and then later calling a person for an examination for discovery or as a witness during trial. The judge hearing the case still gets to weigh the evidence and can accept or reject an affidavit in whole or in part. People try to stuff hearsay, opinion and what not into affidavits and that should be ignored for the most part.

In my jurisdiction one of the side effects of this is you can't have your lawyer swear an affidavit in support of a motion he will be making to the court on your behalf. It would be embarrassing for the Court to question the veracity of the affidavit while the lawyer was in front of them. In other jurisdictions this can have the effect of turning the lawyer into a material witness, allowing them to be cross examined.



The previous case involved an email not an affidavit. Mr. Kavourias never said anything under oath.

With respect to the merits, in support of its assertion that “Foam Corps” is deceptively similar to its “Battle Foam” mark and, therefore, is causing confusion among the consuming public, Battle Foam submitted what it says is an e-mail it received from a man named Jim Kavourias:

My name is Jim and I’m writing you because I have run
into a problem. I recently got some custom cut foam
for my army transport. When my foam arrived I was
surprised to see that the quality of the foam was much
less then what you post on your site. I ordered
several troop trays and I am mainly upset with the
quality of the glue and overall design. When I placed
my order I spoke to a man named Brian from foam corps.
He explained to me that “all battlefoam trays” are the
same quality and that my order would come out perfect.
At this point I am completely baffled since I had no
idea that these are not battlefoam trays. Your company
needs to place some kind of disclaimer pointing this
out to us customers. All foam looks the same to me and
when other companies are telling us that their trays
are the same and that they sell battlefoam it makes
things very hard. I tried to call the company I bought
it [from] but the sales guy told me to contact you.
Please help as I feel cheated here and foam corps or
battlefoam or whatever needs to make things right.

And although the judge had some comments about the email, there wasn't really a finding of fact that it was bogus:

It is, of course, possible that the fifth round pick of the
Florida Marlins in the 2000 draft is both a fan of Diablo bats
and a collector in the war gaming miniature market who is
familiar with Battle Foam’s products. It is also possible that
the baseball player who provided the testimonial for Diablo bats
and the confused customer who contacted Battle Foam simply share
the same name. A third possibility is decidedly less savory and,
hopefully, is not the case here.

....


As currently developed, the record in this case contains
some suggestion that Battle Foam’s evidence of consumer confusion
regarding the parties’ respective marks may be suspect.

It would be something to keep in the back of your head as counsel, but not something you could just walk into court and throw down. It's not really relevant to the current dispute so you would need an angle. If a finding of fact had been made about fraud on the court, that would be a different story.



Re frivolous suing:

Common law courts tend to be very plaintiff friendly - it takes quite a lot to be declared a vexatious litigant. The idea being the courts want people to be able to go to court to solve their problems.

Here are some examples of what consitutes vexatious litigation taken from Onischuk v Alberta, 2013 ABQB 89 (http://canlii.ca/t/fsvjq), a case in Alberta, where the plaintiff demanded that "defence counsel and the judiciary submit to various forms of “lie detection exams” and the administration of a “truth serum” drug."

The local rules of court say this (note the use of the word persistent):

[I]nstituting vexatious proceedings or conducting a proceeding in a vexatious manner includes, without limitation, any one or more of the following:
(a) persistently bringing proceedings to determine an issue that has already been determined by a court of competent jurisdiction;
(b) persistently bringing proceedings that cannot succeed or that have no reasonable expectation of providing relief;
(c) persistently bringing proceedings for improper purposes;
(d) persistently using previously raised grounds and issues in subsequent proceedings inappropriately;
(e) persistently failing to pay the costs of unsuccessful proceedings on the part of the person who commenced those proceedings;
(f) persistently taking unsuccessful appeals from judicial decisions;
(g) persistently engaging in inappropriate courtroom behaviour.

And the common law has interpreted those rules / added on to those rules in the following way:

The courts[1] have repeatedly identified the following characteristics as indicia of vexatious proceedings:
(a) the bringing of one or more actions to determine an issue which has already been determined by a court of competent jurisdiction constitutes a vexatious proceeding;
(b) where it is obvious that an action cannot succeed, or if the action would lead to no possible good, or if no reasonable person can reasonably expect to obtain relief, the action is vexatious;
(c) those brought for an improper purpose, including the harassment and oppression of other parties by multifarious proceedings brought for purposes other than the assertion of legitimate rights;
(d) generally, cases where the grounds and issues raised tend to be rolled forward into subsequent actions and repeated and supplemented, often with actions brought against the lawyers who have acted for or against the litigant in earlier proceedings, or the judiciary involved in rulings on previous cases;
(e) the failure of the person instituting the subsequent proceedings to pay the costs of unsuccessful earlier proceedings; and
(f) conduct in persistently taking unsuccessful appeals from judicial decisions.

The rules will change depending on where you are of course. There are also usually rules of professional conduct that say lawyers should not let themselves be used to file a vexatious lawsuit, or be involved in an abuse of the legal system (for example, sending legal threats solely to harass people).

--------------

Having your lawyer write a C&D in response to someone posting what you believe to be a bunch of nasty baseless lies about your business is perfectly normal and not vexatious though.

Thanks for the info czakk, you rock.

So it sounds like unless there is some kind of more official ruling it's hard to use previous info brought to court. Perhaps it was beneficial for Battlefoam that that case was essentially thrown out due to improper venue?

In this case, could other incidences of character be used to build a case (on either side), or would they be primarily sticking to that article and incidences in that article. For instance, would BoK be able to build off of Romeo's previous correspondences under Diablo Bats, and/or would Battlefoam be able to build off of BoK's articles about non-Romeo, non-Battlefoam subjects?

In re: Frivolous Suing
Bryan Wade posted on the Popehat article ( http://www.popehat.com/2013/05/02/battlefoam-learns-why-legal-threats-can-be-dangerous/ ) that he had an Injunction Against Harassment enacted, so I'm guessing that there was more to this than just the lawsuit? I'm assuming a culmination of things that he listed and maybe things not listed.

I'm also interested in the addition of Jane Doe Hayden. Possibly a spouse or other family member. I'm assuming they would have to be allegedly involved in some way.