Digital Homicide Sues Steam Users; Gets Dropped by Valve

[Skayaq]

I guess when nobody wants to buy your shitty games you have to try and find other ways to earn your money.

[zito]

How are they going to get 18 million from 100 users? Thank god Valve dropped their asses.

[Blueobelisk]

How are they going to get 18 million from 100 users? Thank god Valve dropped their asses.

Each negative review clearly cost them $180k in lost profits. If it wasn't for those reviews, they definitely would have sold millions of copies of their games.

It's very simple economics.

[Ravenblade]

Clearly death threats and stalking developers is out of line but they are trying to mix several issues here. Their "game" titles are usually being sold as package with fake discounts in special actions ping-ponged between them and their own affiliates. DH from the beginning has been trying to whack-a-mole criticism and clobber critics like Jim Sterling through lawsuits.

I also believe that Valve is being dishonest. Their own lack of quality control caused charlatans such as Digital Homicide to appear on Steam who had greenlit dump truck after dump truck full of shovelware which then proceeded to unload their payloads onto their own platform. They allowed for malpractices in regards to freebies-for-votes to happen and fostered ginormous amounts of hostility of those who saw actually quality being drowned by countless <generic rename of unity asset here>'s and <my first meme game>'s among other low quality lulz-"games" being nothing more than a game's pendant to a Hello World! script. It's no surprise this has caused a lot of people to troll and harass developers, especially those prone to trolling back like DH. It's a direct and correlating result of Valve's own quality policies or lack thereof.

[Deleted]

I also believe that Valve is being dishonest. Their own lack of quality control caused charlatans such as Digital Homicide to appear on Steam who had greenlit dump truck after dump truck full of shovelware which then proceeded to unload their payloads onto their own platform. They allowed for malpractices in regards to freebies-for-votes to happen and fostered ginormous amounts of hostility of those who saw actually quality being drowned by countless <generic rename of unity asset here>'s and <my first meme game>'s among other low quality lulz-"games" being nothing more than a game's pendant to a Hello World! script. It's no surprise this has caused a lot of people to troll and harass developers, especially those prone to trolling back like DH. It's a direct and correlating result of Valve's own quality policies or lack thereof.

QFT. There are a few good games with potential in Greenlight. But they seem to be drown in a huge amount of shovelware and thus hard to find. While the basic idea is nice, and it would provide smaller studios and developers who really care a platform to promote their games, it would need far more moderation and quality control to be less abuseable. It allowed things like this to happen in the first place.

[DesoPL]

Clearly death threats and stalking developers is out of line but they are trying to mix several issues here. Their "game" titles are usually being sold as package with fake discounts in special actions ping-ponged between them and their own affiliates. DH from the beginning has been trying to whack-a-mole criticism and clobber critics like Jim Sterling through lawsuits.

I also believe that Valve is being dishonest. Their own lack of quality control caused charlatans such as Digital Homicide to appear on Steam who had greenlit dump truck after dump truck full of shovelware which then proceeded to unload their payloads onto their own platform. They allowed for malpractices in regards to freebies-for-votes to happen and fostered ginormous amounts of hostility of those who saw actually quality being drowned by countless <generic rename of unity asset here>'s and <my first meme game>'s among other low quality lulz-"games" being nothing more than a game's pendant to a Hello World! script. It's no surprise this has caused a lot of people to troll and harass developers, especially those prone to trolling back like DH. It's a direct and correlating result of Valve's own quality policies or lack thereof.

The Slaughthering Grounds i get for free from site WhosGamingNow and my wtf moment happend, when i saw who maked this game, after an year of getting it. xD

Good i deleted that game from my library though. But still the problem is that games like that, will be more on steam because Greenlight.

[bbr]

Oh look, they posted an email address! -> support@digitalhomicide.ninja <-
Could somebody remind me what happens to email addresses that get posted on the internet,. without any kind of editing done to it?

Hint: Viagra, russian brides, etc,. right?

[A dot Ham]

If I bad mouth about Legion on this message board, can Blizzard sue me?

Technically yes, with a few provisos.

(1) Whether painted in a neutral, positive, or negative light it couldn't be true (meaning you'd have to lie about something)
(2) They would have to determine (reasonably) the damage your comment(s) in dollars (meaning how much money did they lose as a result of your negative comments)
(3) You would kind of have to be an influential person... meaning they would have to prove that (xxx,xxx) people did not purchase legion because "xenogear3" said and quote, "I would not wipe my butt with it."


In general I would say that some people are heavily influenced by reviews. I have a buddy that won't watch anything lower than a 70% on rottentomatoes.com and watches some REALLY shitty stuff just because it has a high rating. He plays video games the same way.

Some people (like myself) don't care what some random nobody thinks, or what some hoity-toity film critic thinks.

I think that these lawsuits walk a very fine line. If these users with youtube channels can be held liable, then what about magazines, and websites that score these games based on given criteria? Free speech?

Honestly though the very fact that Valve dropped them and is essentially standing by its customers... speaks volumes and will probably be the nail in the coffin for Digital Homicide's case.

Don't like bad reviews? Make better games...

- - - Updated - - -

Each negative review clearly cost them $180k in lost profits. If it wasn't for those reviews, they definitely would have sold millions of copies of their games.

It's very simple economics.

Not sure what that has to do with economics... math maybe...

- - - Updated - - -

http://www.digitalhomicide.ninja/

First i'd like to briefly respond to Doug Lombardi's official statement about Digital Homicide and its owners. I'd like to give some context to his offficial statement "Valve has stopped doing business with Digital Homicide for being hostile to Steam customers." What has actually transpired was a lack of resolution from Steam in regards to moderation of their platform which might sound like a tough job to do, but coming from a company that brags its profitability per employee is higher than google, it just shows a reckless disregard for for the well being of their community for profits. We submitted numerous reports and sent multiple emails in regards to individuals making personal attacks, harassment, and more on not only us but on other Steam customers who were actually interested in our products. The lawsuit that was submitted in regards to a handful of Steam users has been labeled by the media and now by Doug Lombardi's(a Valve representative) statement as "being hostile to Steam users" in general which is incorrect. The lawsuit recently filed is solely in regards to individuals where no resolution was able to be obtained from Steam to provide a safe environment for us to conduct business. By removing us for defending ourselves against harassment Steam is openly stating you cannot defend yourself from examples like these:

When someone bothers you on say a platform like Facebook and you find the need to ban them, the Facebook response after you ban is "Sorry you had this experience" and then that person is removed from being able to post on your page. Steam's stance is what just happened to us. By removing us they have taken the stance that users have the right to harass me, tell me I should kill myself, and insult my family . If I try to defend myself against said actions then I lose my family's income. If it wasn't for 2 years of experience of dealing with Steam on a regular basis, this disgusting stance would seem shocking to me. The only thing that prevented me seeking legal counsel for a long list of breach of contracts, interference with business, and anti-trust issues was the fear of losing my family's income. Since that has been taken away I am seeking legal representation. The case will benefit from a long list of organized documentation of events that have happened over the past 2 years including dates, screenshots, emails, and more on over 100 infractions in need of litigation. Legal counsel interested in our case can contact us at support@digitalhomicide.ninja

What he is saying is very different than what the OP posted.

Suing for harassment, and suing for defamation can be very different things.

[Triggered Fridgekin]

After a couple more of these doozies, It's only a matter of time before the justice system drops them too for vexatious litigation.

[A dot Ham]

You know what they say though, no publicity is bad publicity.

I suspect that at less than $3.00 per game, people will be buying the games just to see how "bad" they really are.

[dextersmith]

Oh look, they posted an email address! -> support@digitalhomicide.ninja <-
Could somebody remind me what happens to email addresses that get posted on the internet,. without any kind of editing done to it?

Hint: Viagra, russian brides, etc,. right?

How many times are they going to court with other people's money? As if people would endorse them suing steam users.

Didn't they try to go after Sterling before with public funds? Did they drop the suit due to lack of funds or did they lose the case? Why are they trying to sue him for being too Sterling again? The case will get thrown out.

[alzoron]

For being a digital company their website is not very mobile optimized

Their site doesn't really seem optimized for *any* platform.

[Triggered Fridgekin]

How many times are they going to court with other people's money? As if people would endorse them suing steam users.

Lifted from th JimSterling subreddit

"Trying to sum up what i have found myself: - Romine came to court representing themselves, it is also stated by Romine that 'No lawyer will represent him' - Jim's Lawyers made a motion to dismiss the case under claims that the comments made were Jims opinion aimed at DH the company and not Romine as a person Pointing out that the case is under Romine and not Digital Homicide, not sure if this because of American Legal system or not - We are currently in Romine's motion in response to the defendant’s motion to dismiss the plaintiff’s opposition in response to the defendant’s motion to dismiss the plaintiff’s case. Confusing no?

It has been two months since the last real update to the case (that I have managed to find) and the last part was their motion to dismiss Jim's motion to dismiss the claim and it we are either waiting for their response as to why it should be denied or accepted. I believe Romine has made a claim and given a reason only to ask for another chance and an extension on the due date... Its really confusing if you don't speak legal-ese. Now with above statement, I may not be a hundred percent correct with some of the above statements. Anything I say is purely what i have managed to find online at places like MMO Fallout and Plainsite. If I have made any in-corrections please let me know and i will fix them. Now its 3am for me and i am badly in need of sleep."

Grain of salt but better than nothing.

[dextersmith]

(3) You would kind of have to be an influential person... meaning they would have to prove that (xxx,xxx) people did not purchase legion because "xenogear3" said and quote, "I would not wipe my butt with it."

He is entitled to express his opinion so I don't think he'd be on the hook for reduced sales based on that. It is his butt after all.

What he is saying is very different than what the OP posted.

Suing for harassment, and suing for defamation can be very different things.

They say that Steam's stance on the matter is not new as they have endured it for 2 years. Why would they subject themselves to all that for so long? Furthermore, users did not cause him to lose his income; from what I understand, Steam (not users) expelled them as a result of their legal pursuit, not before.

- - - Updated - - -

Lifted from th JimSterling subreddit



Grain of salt but better than nothing.

If the first paragraph is true, the case should be dropped.

[A dot Ham]

He is entitled to express his opinion so I don't think he'd be on the hook for reduced sales based on that. It is his butt after all.

Right he absolutely is. My point on what you quoted is that there has to be some rationality employed here. A comment true or not, damaging or not, would have to be seen/liked/bumped by several hundred thousand people. To even win a case for damages in the millions of dollars.

They say that Steam's stance on the matter is not new as they have endured it for 2 years. Why would they subject themselves to all that for so long? Furthermore, users did not cause him to lose his income; from what I understand, Steam (not users) expelled them as a result of their legal pursuit, not before.

and here my point was that suing for lost sales as a result of defamation is not appropriate and a defense attorney would/should move to have a case on those grounds thrown out.

He does however have a strong case for harassment, and now that he has lost his "marketplace" as a result of continued harassment and said lawsuit he may have a stronger case.

The question now is:
(1) Is he suing for defamation or for harassment?
(2) Will he even be able to collect and was it worth it to lose his marketplace spot?

[dextersmith]

Right he absolutely is. My point on what you quoted is that there has to be some rationality employed here. A comment true or not, damaging or not, would have to be seen/liked/bumped by several hundred thousand people. To even win a case for damages in the millions of dollars.

If that was so, wouldn't it mean that many people share that opinion? Implying a quantity of truth, and that one opinion alone was not responsible for the loss?

[xenogear3]

Technically yes, with a few provisos.

(3) You would kind of have to be an influential person... meaning they would have to prove that (xxx,xxx) people did not purchase legion because "xenogear3" said and quote, "I would not wipe my butt with it."

If I am an influential person, why do I waste my life on a message board?

[darkwarrior42]

For being a digital company their website is not very mobile optimized

For being a digital company, their website looks like a shitty geocities throwback from the nineties.

[Dezerte]

Right he absolutely is. My point on what you quoted is that there has to be some rationality employed here. A comment true or not, damaging or not, would have to be seen/liked/bumped by several hundred thousand people. To even win a case for damages in the millions of dollars.

It has to libelous; "wiped my butt with it" isn't libel, "blizzard is a group of pedophiles" is.

[A dot Ham]

If that was so, wouldn't it mean that many people share that opinion? Implying a quantity of truth, and that one opinion alone was not responsible for the loss?

Not necessarily. One could equally infer that they were deterred from a purchase altogether simply by the "review".

It isn't really something you can pull from simply views, likes, or responses.

Which is why a case for defamation is unlikely to be fruitful.

- - - Updated - - -

If I am an influential person, why do I waste my life on a message board?

There is a whole job market of people who make a decent living as an internet lurker and youtuber.

Your opinion of them is kind of irrelevant.

Based on the lawsuit a given youtuber/reviewer would need only influence 60,000 and convince them not to buy said games at $3 a pop. The trick would be proving that fact.