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.

 Breotan wrote:

 Polonius wrote:

 Warboss Gubbinz wrote:
Time to go with Sabol instead.

Don't do it.

Unless your army is tiny, Sabol is a severly second class product. When you're trying to protect a huge investment of time and money, buy good stuff.

Sabol bags are garbage but the foam is pretty good. Cheaper than Romeo's, too, iirc.

Hey mod's why is it only the people that like Sabol got the red text? Is Battlefoam a sponsor or honest mistake?

It seems to me that the fact that we are four pages into a thread about the case would indicate that Romeo Filip is a public figure within the little world of tabletop wargaming, which is his area of business.

If he were not, no-one would be interested in discussing things.




Automatically Appended Next Post:

tgf wrote:

 Breotan wrote:

 Polonius wrote:

 Warboss Gubbinz wrote:
Time to go with Sabol instead.

Don't do it.

Unless your army is tiny, Sabol is a severly second class product. When you're trying to protect a huge investment of time and money, buy good stuff.

Sabol bags are garbage but the foam is pretty good. Cheaper than Romeo's, too, iirc.

Hey mod's why is it only the people that like Sabol got the red text? Is Battlefoam a sponsor or honest mistake?

I could make a joke and say that no-one likes Battlefoam.

However the fact is that the thread is about Battlefoam versus Blood of Kittens, so that discussion of Sabol is off topic.

 Kilkrazy wrote:
It seems to me that the fact that we are four pages into a thread about the case would indicate that Romeo Filip is a public figure within the little world of tabletop wargaming, which is his area of business.

If he were not, no-one would be interested in discussing things.

The public's interest in a person isn't the test though. It's the validity of the public's interest.

To over simplify: gossip is not protected, but public debate is.

An FLGS owner in Des Moines would not be a public figure, even if he did all kinds of outrageous things. He might qualify as a limited public figure withint he local business community, but not nationally.

What makes Romeo's status as a public figure more likely is his ubiquityy: he goes to all the cons, makes his own videos, runs a podcast, engages people online, and in general is not only the owner of a national (if niche) business, but is an active participant in community discussion. The courts generally hold that a person that eagerly seeks the spotlight has to take the good with the bad.

To draw contrast: the guy that owns Sabol is not a public figure. He doesn't do a lot of promotion, he's not a loud figure, and while I've met the man a couple of times I can't even remember his name. He's a private figure.

czakk wrote:

The guy to get covering this would be Ken over at http://www.popehat.com/. He's a free speech attorney and blogger and a certified geek, so it might be interesting enough for him to look into.

One of the attorney's listed in Tasty's filling is Marc Randazza, who's name I've seen pop up on Popehat a few times. I think he has a bit of a name in 1st Amendment cases and Anti-SLAPP suits. So getting Ken's help would just lead to getting somebody like Randazza to take the case.

I meant cover in the blogger sense - gather the various filings, comment on their merits, etc... This is in state court not federal which means we need someone local in order to get court documents. Can't just fire up PACER.

The fact that Randazza is involved does increase the chances he'll have a post or two.


Speaking of anti-SLAPP - does filing for a declaratory judgement preclude the use of the anti-SLAPP statute?

 Polonius wrote:
he goes to all the cons, makes his own videos, runs a podcast, engages people online, and in general is not only the owner of a national (if niche) business, but is an active participant in community discussion. The courts generally hold that a person that eagerly seeks the spotlight has to take the good with the bad.

A minor point of order, BF is an international business, as he does have warehouses outside the states, and both ships and distributes internationally. Which, of course, only reinforces your statement.

 Hulksmash wrote:
I did enjoy the stickers in the elevator at Adepticon though

Yeah - and of course the stickers caused issues that AdeptiCon and Westin staff had to deal with since they were placed on other vendor booths and throughout different areas in the hotel. Westin staff were not happy with this and neither were some of the other vendors that we work with.

So a message to the person / people who did this. Please find a different method of protest. Because while you may have achieved some personal satisfaction, all you did was cause problems for an overworked volunteer AdeptiCon staff and an hotel that tries to bring you a wonderful atmosphere to meet up with other enthusiasts.

 Inquisitor_Malice wrote:

 Hulksmash wrote:
I did enjoy the stickers in the elevator at Adepticon though

Yeah - and of course the stickers caused issues that AdeptiCon and Westin staff had to deal with since they were placed on other vendor booths and throughout different areas in the hotel. Westin staff were not happy with this and neither were some of the other vendors that we work with.

So a message to the person / people who did this. Please find a different method of protest. Because while you may have achieved some personal satisfaction, all you did was cause problems for an overworked volunteer AdeptiCon staff and an hotel that tries to bring you a wonderful atmosphere to meet up with other enthusiasts.

As someone who did not attend Adepticon I have not seen the stickers and would be interested to know what they said/displayed. If you don't want to give them anymore publicity could you at least PM me?

Okay I'll ask - stickers?

Marcus Scipio wrote:

 Inquisitor_Malice wrote:

 Hulksmash wrote:
I did enjoy the stickers in the elevator at Adepticon though

Yeah - and of course the stickers caused issues that AdeptiCon and Westin staff had to deal with since they were placed on other vendor booths and throughout different areas in the hotel. Westin staff were not happy with this and neither were some of the other vendors that we work with.

So a message to the person / people who did this. Please find a different method of protest. Because while you may have achieved some personal satisfaction, all you did was cause problems for an overworked volunteer AdeptiCon staff and an hotel that tries to bring you a wonderful atmosphere to meet up with other enthusiasts.

As someone who did not attend Adepticon I have not seen the stickers and would be interested to know what they said/displayed. If you don't want to give them anymore publicity could you at least PM me?

It was a simple white sticker that said, "Romeo is a Douche".


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 notprop wrote:
Okay I'll ask - stickers?

Someone was placing stickers around the convention that said what I said in the above part of my post

It's all about timing my man.

I'm sorry I didn't see that.

I think I'll have to get that engraved in my next BF tray I order.

 notprop wrote:
It's all about timing my man.

The first time I saw them it was in a picture, and from what I heard, it was humorous, but as they started to appear in more and more places, it did become a little annoying knowing the hotel staff, which was very accomodating to the convention goers, had to keep cleaning up the stickers... If they were placed on fliers, paper, and basically something that would be thrown away at the end of the convention, it wouldn't be as big of a dick move.

So while a bit of drama in the GW world has been lacking of late - this one is kind of sad. We are guys playing a hobby. We have Battlefoam that makes a good product for our hobby. Either buy it and support them - or if you don't like their business practices - buy from someone else.

While full of humor for me - a lawsuit over a post on a blog in our hobby is a sad state of affairs. It's really bad that we've had our hobby turn from guys getting together and having fun at tournaments - into lawsuits, flame wars, etc. Seems to have started about the time that the "competitive" bent to 40K started - but that's my opinion. In a niche hobby we should encourage each other vs. tear it down. The fact we have a company that even makes products like Battlefoam is really cool.

Didn't see the stickers at Adepticon personally - but heard about them from a few of the Organizers I know. Pretty juvenile thing to do. Also heard it really made the Westin staff upset. If you don't like a guy's way he does business - don't buy from him. If asked your opinion for a review - state it but don't make it personal.

So, in interest of keeping this bad boy on topic,

has anyone actually managed to get the text of that article?

 Aldonis wrote:
So while a bit of drama in the GW world has been lacking of late - this one is kind of sad. We are guys playing a hobby. We have Battlefoam that makes a good product for our hobby. Either buy it and support them - or if you don't like their business practices - buy from someone else.

While full of humor for me - a lawsuit over a post on a blog in our hobby is a sad state of affairs. It's really bad that we've had our hobby turn from guys getting together and having fun at tournaments - into lawsuits, flame wars, etc. Seems to have started about the time that the "competitive" bent to 40K started - but that's my opinion. In a niche hobby we should encourage each other vs. tear it down. The fact we have a company that even makes products like Battlefoam is really cool.

Didn't see the stickers at Adepticon personally - but heard about them from a few of the Organizers I know. Pretty juvenile thing to do. Also heard it really made the Westin staff upset. If you don't like a guy's way he does business - don't buy from him. If asked your opinion for a review - state it but don't make it personal.

If you don't like how someone does business, certainly, don't buy from him. Also, feel free to offer your opinion even if you aren't asked. If your dislike of the way a person does business is personal (I don't buy Coke products anymore because the CEO kicked my mother and gave my dog cancer when I told him I enjoy Pepsi as well.) then, well, you might just have to call a spade a spade. If you don't let people know about this unsavory business practice, then they may end up buying a product which they will later regret.

Now, yes, plastering stickers all over the place where people need to scrape them off isn't exactly the height of good manners. A 'RiaD' t-shirt, however, could be hilarious.

Christ almighty riding shotgun in a Pinto, there's nothing wrong with sharing an opinion.

I really do hope that this case gets tossed. Random internet banter about a guy who seems to have never left the military and treats everyone who disagrees with him as an enemy that must be destroyed is just laughable. He doesn't need lawsuits, he needs therapy and anger management. He seems like a very high energy type that has way to many redbulls in the morning with his coffee. He invites conflict like it is a long lost relative.

I can only hope that with this lawsuit, he doesn't try any of the silly antics that he attempted during his failed Foamwars lawsuit. If any of that info is available to the judge, Romeo will have a very uphill battle just trying to prove that the case is legit.

At least it provides entertaining reading material to the rest of us. Romeo has always been consistent with that regard.

Regarding the stickers at Adepticon...I giggled often, but sticking them to the hotel itself was rather uncool. I agree 100% with the sticker content, though, so maybe BoK could make a shirt and sell it to help defer their legal expenses. Future Cons would get interesting indeed as we watched the police come and go.

I have no problem with people expressing their opinion by placing the stickers on their own booths, items, and trapper keepers (hey, it reminds me of a late 80's/early 90's junior high protest!) but the line should be drawn at doing so at the time and expense of others. Feel free to sticker up all of your own stuff and then goo-gone clean it off in your free time.... don't force others to do the latter just so you can express your opinion louder.

Yeah, that sounds pretty crappy.. weather you like the guy or not, putting stickers about it all over walls of someone's business and stuff is pretty juvenile, heck it almost sounds like vandalism in a way. Hopefully the hotel didn't charge the adepticon folks for the cleanup.

 Necros wrote:
Yeah, that sounds pretty crappy.. weather you like the guy or not, putting stickers about it all over walls of someone's business and stuff is pretty juvenile, heck it almost sounds like vandalism in a way. Hopefully the hotel didn't charge the adepticon folks for the cleanup.

By its definition, The stickers were a form of vandalism. Defacement of property is what happened, and that is the basic definition of vandalism. Now, back to the pointless litigation!

 Polonius wrote:
What makes Romeo's status as a public figure more likely is his ubiquityy: he goes to all the cons, makes his own videos, runs a podcast, engages people online, and in general is not only the owner of a national (if niche) business, but is an active participant in community discussion. The courts generally hold that a person that eagerly seeks the spotlight has to take the good with the bad./quote]

He's also a big name in the baseball bat industry, or did that come to an end?

Shepherd23 wrote:

 Necros wrote:
Yeah, that sounds pretty crappy.. weather you like the guy or not, putting stickers about it all over walls of someone's business and stuff is pretty juvenile, heck it almost sounds like vandalism in a way. Hopefully the hotel didn't charge the adepticon folks for the cleanup.

By its definition, The stickers were a form of vandalism. Defacement of property is what happened, and that is the basic definition of vandalism. Now, back to the pointless litigation!

It isnt pointless litigation.

BoK has responded to BF's shenanigans by calling them out on it. BF thought they could roll BoK over. BoK just got the first blow it seems.

 Mr. Burning wrote:

Shepherd23 wrote:

 Necros wrote:
Yeah, that sounds pretty crappy.. weather you like the guy or not, putting stickers about it all over walls of someone's business and stuff is pretty juvenile, heck it almost sounds like vandalism in a way. Hopefully the hotel didn't charge the adepticon folks for the cleanup.

By its definition, The stickers were a form of vandalism. Defacement of property is what happened, and that is the basic definition of vandalism. Now, back to the pointless litigation!

It isnt pointless litigation.

BoK has responded to BF's shenanigans by calling them out on it. BF thought they could roll BoK over. BoK just got the first blow it seems.

You are correct in this. What I meant by saying that it is pointless, is that this should never have come to a court in the first place. The whole C&D nonsense was pointless.

Edit: whoops, missed all the red text on page 4.

 BrookM wrote:

 Polonius wrote:
What makes Romeo's status as a public figure more likely is his ubiquityy: he goes to all the cons, makes his own videos, runs a podcast, engages people online, and in general is not only the owner of a national (if niche) business, but is an active participant in community discussion. The courts generally hold that a person that eagerly seeks the spotlight has to take the good with the bad.

He's also a big name in the baseball bat industry, or did that come to an end?

as a limited public figure, the the statements made have to relate somehow to the reason the person is a public figure.

For a general public figure, that is not true.

So, for somebody like, say, Lebron James, a person could publish a report that he was some sort of sexual deviant or criminal, as long as they did it without malice or knowledge that it was false.

for a limited public figure, it cannot be slander if the statement relates to their fame. So, calling out Romeo on his actions as the owner of BF is protected, as that's why he's known. That he is also well known in another community has probably little impact on this. Also, you couldn't, say, accuse Romeo of perversion, as his sexual mores are not part of his status as a public figure.

The law basically divides people into three piles:
private figures: people that are only known personally
Public figures: people that are generally known to many people across a broad spectrum of people
Limited Public Figures: people that are known, but either to a smaller group, location, or community or are known almost entirely because of their involvement in a specific controversy.

The mayor of a town would be a public figure: most people know who he/she is.
A housewife married to a mechanic would be a private figure: only friends, family, and those she does business with know who she is.
A pastor that is heavily involved in charity work and frequently speaks on the topic of poverty would be a limited public figure. A lot of people know who he is, but only because of his involvement in a discussion.

 Absolutionis wrote:

 H.B.M.C. wrote:
Sorry, I'm still struggling to work out what this suit is over?

There's no suit, yet.

Battlefoam issued a takedown notice to BoK for slander threatening legal action.
BoK refused to back down and decided to assemble a lawyer to defend themselves. They're calling the challenge and seeing if Battlefoam will follow through with their threat.

There is a suit, filed by BoK. BF sends a C&D making certain allegations and threatening legal action. The recipient engages a lawyer and files a suit seeking declaratory relief. The potential defendant essentially preempted the threatened lawsuit by bringing the allegations before the Court. If the Court finds that the allegations are without merit, the threatened lawsuit is essentially decided, and the entity that made the threat could be liable for damages.

The allegations are now before the Court, but importantly it is a court of BoK's choosing, so he was essentially able to secure venue in his backyard.

Note, however, that the allegations were made by Battlefoam. I cannot stress that enough. The allegations are before a Court, but they were made by Battlefoam in a C&D that threatened to bring them before a court. So, even though BoK is technically the plaintiff, the allegations the suit is seeking to get a declaration from the Court about originated from the defendant.

Shepherd23 wrote:
You are correct in this. What I meant by saying that it is pointless, is that this should never have come to a court in the first place. The whole C&D nonsense was pointless.

A C&D is like asking a girl for her phone number: it doesn't cost much, and sometimes you get lucky.

alas, sometimes her boyfriend is there, and kicks your ass. In this case, they got hit with a complaint for DJ, which meant they couldn't file suit locally, and now have to respond.

Of course, if the statements made by BoK are not true, then a C&D is actually not a bad thing to do. Based on what I've heard, they were pretty inflamatory. Of course, BoK has multiple affirmative defenses...

So lets say a judge somehow determines that Romeo has a case. Does this mean that another case will follow or will it be determined by this judge as well?

If it is not this judge that will handle it, Does Romeo then get choice of venue?

 Polonius wrote:

Shepherd23 wrote:
You are correct in this. What I meant by saying that it is pointless, is that this should never have come to a court in the first place. The whole C&D nonsense was pointless.

A C&D is like asking a girl for her phone number: it doesn't cost much, and sometimes you get lucky.

alas, sometimes her boyfriend is there, and kicks your ass. In this case, they got hit with a complaint for DJ, which meant they couldn't file suit locally, and now have to respond.

Of course, if the statements made by BoK are not true, then a C&D is actually not a bad thing to do. Based on what I've heard, they were pretty inflamatory. Of course, BoK has multiple affirmative defenses...

Not that I think you would disagree, but inflammatory does not equal defamation. This is a tough road to climb, especially in the US. The only thing that is on Battlefoam's side is, I think, that the article concerned Romeo's business.

Truth is the ultimate defense, but evidence of Romeo's vitriolic participation in such public debates and his arguably considerable efforts to be a public figure will probably end the case before it starts. I do not see any money changing hands over this. My guess is that the Judge will grant the declaratory relief or Romeo's lawyers will have a friendly chat with the plaintiff's big guns and this whole thing will get settled out behind the scenes in a couple of weeks.

An ongoing issue is that it’s rare that the gaming community votes with its wallet. We bitch a moan about "New Coke" but keep buying "New Coke" and choking it down. If only we knew that "Coke Classic" was just around the corner and all we had to do was not buy "New Coke." This reference is probably lost on the foreign members and might be too old for the younger ones but it’s just a good example of how we doom ourselves to be abused by bad business practices. We buy the product.