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.

Czakk, correcting the typo won't change that the Federal court would slap BoK down for even believing he was worthy of their time. Nothing on either end warrants federal judicial oversight. Libel, slander, even bad business practices can be handled in state courts, unless the bad business practice breeches a federal statute, which, I haven't seen any actual breech of federal statutes.

It is effectively two kids whining, and they brought it to adults, who really should just throw the cases away, and tell them to go take a long walk into the sunset, before putting them both in time out.

Edit: Kronk, sometime in July is when the California case officially has an in court hearing.

somewheresomehow wrote:
Because BoK used their influence to throw themselves a rage party on the WWX ks page, which caused Romeo to rage. So, it influenced both BF and WWX. (Or that is what I have heard elsewhere about how it actually started, unless I missed an earlier useless rant from BoK about an angry Romeo?)

So Nick writes the article Meat for Meta: Bad Battlefoam Practices, and states several incidents in which Battlefoam has reneged on promises, started drama/issues for people in the wargaming community, or has threatened to physically assault people and then hypothesizes that WWX is run by Battlefoam and he (Nick) wonders what sort of things might come from this kickstarter based on the previous experiences he's been informed of? Right?

So how is this having a rage party, unless I missed something... I was following that kickstarted like a bad ex-gf

Alfndrate, from what I was told (since I jumped on the WWX ks at the tail end,) and from some of the interpretations one could see from the KS comments around the same time, that there was a massive negative comment stream that began on there that targeted Romeo and BF, and it was a bunch of relatively newly created KS accounts. The assumption being made (I don't entirely believe it, but hey, it is out there, might as well add it to this mix,) was that the sudden influx of bad press towards Romeo and BF, which didn't inherently affect the Outlaw Miniature situation, caused negative gain on the Kickstarter, and thus was a negative gain financially.

Again, I find that above last bit to be a stretch. But, you have to keep all of the information that is out there, that lead to this whole shebang in the first place, so that we can see that it really is just a bunch of posturing by people who shouldn't be posturing and can't afford to do it in the first place.

I have read BoK, and find his writing to be that of a child who couldn't get the pony he asked for, and even the good information he puts out, is drowned out by that childish, whiny nature. Romeo, sometimes needs to take a deep breath... and then let someone else handle what is going on. Delegation of powers is something a business owner needs to realize if there is a PR team of ANY kind within it. Romeo doesn't really do that, and so... when he rages, he rages hard, and does things far away not befitting a business owner, which defeats the purpose of having a business since unlike famous people, businesses suffer under bad press. We can say both are people, being people, on the internet, but that is giving excuses where excuses shouldn't be.

somewheresomehow wrote:
Alfndrate, from what I was told (since I jumped on the WWX ks at the tail end,) and from some of the interpretations one could see from the KS comments around the same time, that there was a massive negative comment stream that began on there that targeted Romeo and BF, and it was a bunch of relatively newly created KS accounts. The assumption being made (I don't entirely believe it, but hey, it is out there, might as well add it to this mix,) was that the sudden influx of bad press towards Romeo and BF, which didn't inherently affect the Outlaw Miniature situation, caused negative gain on the Kickstarter, and thus was a negative gain financially.

Again, I find that above last bit to be a stretch. But, you have to keep all of the information that is out there, that lead to this whole shebang in the first place, so that we can see that it really is just a bunch of posturing by people who shouldn't be posturing and can't afford to do it in the first place.

I have read BoK, and find his writing to be that of a child who couldn't get the pony he asked for, and even the good information he puts out, is drowned out by that childish, whiny nature. Romeo, sometimes needs to take a deep breath... and then let someone else handle what is going on. Delegation of powers is something a business owner needs to realize if there is a PR team of ANY kind within it. Romeo doesn't really do that, and so... when he rages, he rages hard, and does things far away not befitting a business owner, which defeats the purpose of having a business since unlike famous people, businesses suffer under bad press. We can say both are people, being people, on the internet, but that is giving excuses where excuses shouldn't be.

As a regular KS user, I'm pretty sure you can't post comments on a KS page unless you've already backed it. So the theory that people were creating new accounts just to spam poor feedback is unbelievable in my eyes.

As I have done before just to comment to get further information on other KSes, all you need to do is post a dollar, and you can comment. And you can cancel your pledge within seconds.

Also, don't take my above response as giving a care either way. A kickstarter with negativity!? SAY IT AIN'T SOOOO! So, as I said, I doubt there was any such true event that could be definitively tied to anything other than negativity brought about by Romeo's responses on other sites, and on the KS itself, but that is out there, as being information that brought these cascading charlie foxtrots, to bear upon our community.

I just attempted to post comments in a KS I didn't back, and it wouldn't let me. I have a KS account and have backed 3 so far.

If you donate $1, you can comment on that KS, though.

Edit:

somewheresomehow wrote:
As I have done before just to comment to get further information on other KSes, all you need to do is post a dollar, and you can comment. And you can cancel your pledge within seconds.

Beat me to it. That approach, at least, would cost you nothing but time.

somewheresomehow wrote:
Czakk, correcting the typo won't change that the Federal court would slap BoK down for even believing he was worthy of their time. Nothing on either end warrants federal judicial oversight. Libel, slander, even bad business practices can be handled in state courts, unless the bad business practice breeches a federal statute, which, I haven't seen any actual breech of federal statutes.

It is effectively two kids whining, and they brought it to adults, who really should just throw the cases away, and tell them to go take a long walk into the sunset, before putting them both in time out.

Edit: Kronk, sometime in July is when the California case officially has an in court hearing.

Please read the filings and it is pretty clear why the issue is being raised to federal court. It is due to BF forcing the issue on the amount of damages and the statements and claims they have made.



TLDR: The Battlefoam claim is so large federal court is the correct venue.

somewheresomehow wrote:

I have read BoK, and find his writing to be that of a child who couldn't get the pony he asked for, and even the good information he puts out, is drowned out by that childish, whiny nature. Romeo, sometimes needs to take a deep breath... and then let someone else handle what is going on. Delegation of powers is something a business owner needs to realize if there is a PR team of ANY kind within it. Romeo doesn't really do that, and so... when he rages, he rages hard, and does things far away not befitting a business owner, which defeats the purpose of having a business since unlike famous people, businesses suffer under bad press. We can say both are people, being people, on the internet, but that is giving excuses where excuses shouldn't be.

I would read the declarations http://bloodofkittens.com/blog/2013/06/07/network-news-battlefoam-v-blood-kittens-update/ they are pretty damning. That is far in excess of raging on the internet. The Michael Brandt one is by far the worst

 Dysartes wrote:

morkian wrote:
If this does happen can the witnesses claim defamation from Battlefoam? I know in the UK they would not be able to as you can say what you want in a court case without fear of legal reprisal but I'm not sure if the same applies to the US system.

Silly question, but wouldn't that only cover you for what is said in court, not on your own podcast?

Possibly Dysartes, he could potentially claim he was reading from a declaration that was going to be issued to the court but I don't know if the US laws are with regards to it. He could also just probably argue that it wasn't the way he remembered the incidents. Not the greatest arguments in the world but probably enough with the legal protections there is for speech in the US.

somewheresomehow wrote:
Czakk, correcting the typo won't change that the Federal court would slap BoK down for even believing he was worthy of their time.

It was sent back to state court because of a typo. One of the reasons for requesting the federal court take jurisdiction was diversity of the parties, Mr Hayden in California, and Battle Foam and Mr. Filip in Arizona. Mr. Hayden's filing erroneously stated that Mr. Filip and Battle Foam were citizens of California, which meant there was no diversity. On that basis the federal court declined to take jurisdiction.



The next hearing in California is scheduled for the 8th of July.

Some of that is interesting Morkian, thank you for that, since I tend to ignore BoK now like the plague, and try my damnedest to only get information from places like dakka and a few other scant forums, so blogs and podcasts tend to be out for me. So linking something that isn't actually BoK is more enlightening.

That Brandt one... holy great cow in the sky.

I am a bit mind boggled how they think 180k, or even 90k is a possible number? My head actually hurts reading even further, so I may hide away from this thread, as it just gets worse and worse! My mind is melting.

Also, on the defamation of name during testifying in a trial? Has to be grievous enough to cause actual financial, emotional, or mental harm, that can be proven (remember that nanny during the Casey Anthony trial that Casey fingered as the killer? She was successful in her suit because she was actually targetted for verbal and physical abuse by crazed vigilantes ontop of it being grievous lies by Casey Anthony) unless the defamation is truly libelous, then it becomes a whole other ball game, and then if it occurs, the court can actually bring the libelous party to task with additional fines, fees, and then the civil aspect spirals. Contempt of court tends to be the average charge for that.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

czakk wrote:

somewheresomehow wrote:
Czakk, correcting the typo won't change that the Federal court would slap BoK down for even believing he was worthy of their time.

It was sent back to state court because of a typo. One of the reasons for requesting the federal court take jurisdiction was diversity of the parties, Mr Hayden in California, and Battle Foam and Mr. Filip in Arizona. Mr. Hayden's filing erroneously stated that Mr. Filip and Battle Foam were citizens of California, which meant there was no diversity. On that basis the federal court declined to take jurisdiction.



The next hearing in California is scheduled for the 8th of July.

Diversity of the parties only can be emphasized, if there is a case of 75k+, but even then, the Federal Court can relegate it to the State courts.



Above text from the United States federal court website, which is why I am still mind boggled by the 75k price point, or even further amounts.

Also, I thank you both, because this is the most judicial research I have done in months... and is distracting me from some horrible issues here on my end! Have a great afternoon/evening you two!

somewheresomehow wrote:
Some of that is interesting Morkian, thank you for that, since I tend to ignore BoK now like the plague, and linking something that isn't actually BoK is more enlightening.

That Brandt one... holy great cow in the sky.

I am a bit mind boggled how they think 180k, or even 90k is a possible number? My head actually hurts reading even further, so I may hide away from this thread, as it just gets worse and worse! My mind is melting.

Also, on the defamation of name during testifying in a trial? Has to be grievous enough to cause actual financial, emotional, or mental harm, that can be proven (remember that nanny during the Casey Anthony trial that Casey fingered as the killer? She was successful in her suit because she was actually targetted for verbal and physical abuse by crazed vigilantes ontop of it being grievous lies by Casey Anthony) unless the defamation is truly libelous, then it becomes a whole other ball game, and then if it occurs, the court can actually bring the libelous party to task with additional fines, fees, and then the civil aspect spirals. Contempt of court tends to be the average charge for that.

No problem, most of the docs are pretty boring barring the declarations which basically back up the BOK article and do not put BF in a good light. I really wanna see how BF respond to those, I sense it might give us some laughs. That response should also hopefully tell us which way BF are going to try and take the case. The only way I can think of without giving BOK an easy out is "The witness statements are orchestrated frauds." That seems like an explosive legal strategy but I think fits Romeo. If he doesn't do this then BOK can sit behind the "I believed them to be reliable sources and was reporting and what I was told by said reliable sources." A false statement is not defamatory if the person who is repeating it believes it to be true. BOK have all the evidence to prove he believed the statements he made in the article to be true

I have no idea where the figures come from or how they plan to justify them. My first thought it they probably can't they put a stupid figure together to scare him and then had to refuse arbitration because BF wanted to drag it to court. This then gives Randazza a very easy route to get it into Federal court if he so chooses which he did.

The only thing missing on the defamation piece is if the person is a public person. That very much changes how much you can get away with. But again not sure on the US law for this, the UK is watertight that statements in court cannot be pursued (see Mohammed Al Fayed for possibly the most ridiculous example of this) but you may be able to take action in the US especially if he goes the explosive route and claims the witnesses are lying ergo committing perjury with their signed declarations.

I'm not sure what BF are hoping to gain from this. If you're gonna sue everyone who says bad things about you on the internet then you should probably become a lawyer first cos you're gonna spend most of your time in court. If nothing had been done this would have all disappeared and been forgotten about in April.

Well, claiming defamation is a seperate piece. Once the testimony starts, you cannot just outright go "Ohmergerd defamation!" The whole suit has to go through, and then the second suit can commence about defamation. US doesn't have protections that I know of (which doesn't mean they don't exist mind you, but just that I have no history behind having that indepth of knowledge,) to protect statements in court unless they are completely 100% true, elsewise, it can come back to haunt you, much like actual lies, or are grandious exaggerations.

But then, contempt of court will probably be called. And if he rages, he becomes in contempt, and the case is decided fairly quickly.

morkian wrote:

The only thing missing on the defamation piece is if the person is a public person. That very much changes how much you can get away with. But again not sure on the US law for this, the UK is watertight that statements in court cannot be pursued (see Mohammed Al Fayed for possibly the most ridiculous example of this) but you may be able to take action in the US especially if he goes the explosive route and claims the witnesses are lying ergo committing perjury with their signed declarations.

If you look in most of the affidavits that were submitted, towards the bottom there is typically a statement confirming that Romeo is a public person. US law dictates that a public person is exempt from what would usually be considered tortious. This, combined with 1st Amendment laws, are in my view the strongest points of BoK's defense. In any case, Romeo/his pals have all but declared the witnesses committed perjury in their out-of-court interactions...

somewheresomehow wrote:


I have read BoK, and find his writing to be that of a child who couldn't get the pony he asked for, and even the good information he puts out, is drowned out by that childish, whiny nature. Romeo, sometimes needs to take a deep breath... and then let someone else handle what is going on. Delegation of powers is something a business owner needs to realize if there is a PR team of ANY kind within it. Romeo doesn't really do that, and so... when he rages, he rages hard, and does things far away not befitting a business owner, which defeats the purpose of having a business since unlike famous people, businesses suffer under bad press. We can say both are people, being people, on the internet, but that is giving excuses where excuses shouldn't be.

I got that pony thank you very much and funny I thought of you when I read your posts to this thread excuses being excuses and all.

 tastytaste wrote:
I got that pony thank you very much and funny I thought of you when I read your posts to this thread excuses being excuses and all.

Huh?

And glad you got the pony, doesn't change how I view your writing. You bring up amazing points, but your prose is quite horrid.

Its his own style. Love him or hate him, it gets the point across.

I am interested to see if this will really make it to federal court.

Oh, I am totally okay with him writing that way. I may not like it, but the 1st Amendment means he can write that way, and means I can voice my opinion of his writing style. Wouldn't want it any other way, really.

I hope it doesn't, because it would just be truly facepalmy. So much wasted pro bono work (on BoK's side), and wasted lawyer fees etc on BF's side, because Federal court bumps the costs up significantly, and to actually win on the federal level is pretty hard unless proof is relatively solid or you have a crack lawyer team, and your costs may not be outweighed by your judgment

My hope is it gets punted back to the state courts, which the feds can do, and then Arizona and California can have at it. Means that it is cheaper overall for both, and the likelihood of judgments coming out to equal fees is higher.

As well, a bit more transparency on the case, from my knowledge of how it all works, so we can have regular updates we can grab as third parties.

Actually, federal court tends to be much easier to extract information from (PACER, while annoying, is at least consistent). California state courts don't have a uniform approach to electronic document posting, and often have nothing available online at the trial court level.

Then maybe it would be beneficial. Could also consolidate both cases into a single one, since the Federal court jurisdicition would override both the California court and the Arizona court case controls, even with them being both 'seperate' suits.


Thank you for the information! I have only heard horror stories from some of the law professors I have had for some of my supplimental classes on American jurisprudence and International Law.

somewheresomehow wrote:
and wasted lawyer fees etc on BF's side, because Federal court bumps the costs up significantly, and to actually win on the federal level is pretty hard unless proof is relatively solid or you have a crack lawyer team, and your costs may not be outweighed by your judgment

Yeah, I'm wondering if by BF trying to sue for an exorbitant sum, whether he's actually going to be able to recoup all of his expenses (unless the court rules overwhelmingly in his favor and BoK has to pay his expenses too)

BoK's legal team, even doing pro bono, is probably working their butt off too. So, though they could get "publicity" for winning, it would still be one heck of a ride. So their time, is effective money.

Whoever wins, still loses, legal team wise, unless BoK wins a large sum victory and BF is forced to pay legal fees, or the converse occurs. Otherwise, mediocre victories either way, is a loss to the legal teams involved.

Moral victories can still occur for either side, I am just speaking up for the lawyers (which... sounds so odd!)

somewheresomehow wrote:
BoK's legal team, even doing pro bono, is probably working their butt off too. So, though they could get "publicity" for winning, it would still be one heck of a ride. So their time, is effective money.

Whoever wins, still loses, legal team wise, unless BoK wins a large sum victory and BF is forced to pay legal fees, or the converse occurs. Otherwise, mediocre victories either way, is a loss to the legal teams involved.

Moral victories can still occur for either side, I am just speaking up for the lawyers (which... sounds so odd!)

Pyrrhic victory.

somewheresomehow wrote:
BoK's legal team, even doing pro bono, is probably working their butt off too. So, though they could get "publicity" for winning, it would still be one heck of a ride. So their time, is effective money.

Whoever wins, still loses, legal team wise, unless BoK wins a large sum victory and BF is forced to pay legal fees, or the converse occurs. Otherwise, mediocre victories either way, is a loss to the legal teams involved.

Moral victories can still occur for either side, I am just speaking up for the lawyers (which... sounds so odd!)

Yea, this is a BS case, but at the end of the day, it is Romeo who is forcing it through the courts. I personally can't blame Hayden for attempting to defend himself. Romeo could have allowed this thing to die the minute Hayden filed his DJ action. Instead, he decided to double down.

Now, we have a crappy lawsuit that is going to fabulously waste my taxpayer dollars. It will be a financial drain on the public, waste the much in demand time of the court(s), and be an emotional and financial drain on the parties. No good can come from this litigation, unless you feel it is an important 1st Amendment issue, but then that's pretty well cut and dry. This thing has settlement written all over it, and it would greatly benefit from a bit of mandatory mediation. But again, you can't settle with someone who does not want to settle, and who would that be in this case?

weeble1000 wrote:

somewheresomehow wrote:
BoK's legal team, even doing pro bono, is probably working their butt off too. So, though they could get "publicity" for winning, it would still be one heck of a ride. So their time, is effective money.

Whoever wins, still loses, legal team wise, unless BoK wins a large sum victory and BF is forced to pay legal fees, or the converse occurs. Otherwise, mediocre victories either way, is a loss to the legal teams involved.

Moral victories can still occur for either side, I am just speaking up for the lawyers (which... sounds so odd!)

Yea, this is a BS case, but at the end of the day, it is Romeo who is forcing it through the courts. I personally can't blame Hayden for attempting to defend himself. Romeo could have allowed this thing to die the minute Hayden filed his DJ action. Instead, he decided to double down.

It's called All or Nothing.

IIRC, Hayden did mention that he tried to resolve it with Romeo, and had indeed submitted a response asking for a time extension, of which Romeo's lawyers rejected and maintained the less-than-a-week that he had to respond to his ultimatum.

A bit tangentially, but how did the controversy of people thinking Romeo tried to hide his involvement with WWX start?

From listening to the D6 Generation I knew about him owning the company behind the Kickstarter from the start. So what was the perceived deception?

Yeah, not sure about that one. I first heard about WWX through the 40k Radio podcast and was clear from then it was Romeo's project.

I haven't heard that section of it, but, really, I am just watching this thread now to see how it all plays out.

Look at comments like this for examples of Romeo trying to hide his involvement:

We would also like to comment on the continued mention of Battle Foam and Romeo in this thread. The Outlaw Miniatures team is made up of many hard working people looking to build a great game.

It is in no way part of Battle Foam outside of getting bags made by them. Romeo is a large part of the team because it is his concept and fluff. The rest of the team is made up of graphic artists, sculptors, painters, and gamers.

This new world is being created to bring forward a new and exciting IP to the market dealing strictly with the wild west. What Battle Foam does with its partners has nothing to do with this nor does this project effect Battle Foam.

One of Romeo's main points was that his dedication rests with his partners and the hard work needed at Battle Foam. That was the only way he would sign up for this.

http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/30/486530.page#5065305

 outriderhobbies wrote:
Look at comments like this for examples of Romeo trying to hide his involvement:

We would also like to comment on the continued mention of Battle Foam and Romeo in this thread. The Outlaw Miniatures team is made up of many hard working people looking to build a great game.

It is in no way part of Battle Foam outside of getting bags made by them. Romeo is a large part of the team because it is his concept and fluff. The rest of the team is made up of graphic artists, sculptors, painters, and gamers.

This new world is being created to bring forward a new and exciting IP to the market dealing strictly with the wild west. What Battle Foam does with its partners has nothing to do with this nor does this project effect Battle Foam.

One of Romeo's main points was that his dedication rests with his partners and the hard work needed at Battle Foam. That was the only way he would sign up for this.

http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/30/486530.page#5065305

That comment is supposed to hide Romeo's involvement? It quite clearly says "Romeo is a large part of the team because it is his concept and fluff." right there. What this says to me is that it and Battle Foam are separate, not that it and Romeo are separate, which seems perfectly legit to me.

Yeah, that's separating 2 different companies. BF and WWX are probably separate LLCs with separate sets of owners, but Romeo is front and center there.

Romeo clearly stated several times that he was involved in WWE. The distinction was made such that the Battlefoam company and the WWE company were not involved. All this is true. There was no deceit here.

People may be getting rather hung up on Romeo not being up front about Outlaw being headed by him. This makes sense considering his questionable reputation. Then again, he had no obligation to do so; he created a new company as a sort of 'clean slate' to distance his product from his reputation.