Page 1 of 72 1231151 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 719

Thread: Reluctantly Building a Lawsuit against DoTA2 Mute. (Discuss/Collaborate)

  1. #1
    Basic Member Meiun's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Posts
    185

    Reluctantly Building a Lawsuit against DoTA2 Mute. (Discuss/Collaborate)

    Building a lawsuit should valve turn DoTA2 into a source of grevious emotional distress and terror over the fact that anything can result in a reports including not talking at all or even being muted.
    Feel free to discuss or add in; DoTA2 devs might just close this to try to prevent any discussion and hush it up.

    Others who can prove they've had to endure harassment, further bans because of reports over an inability to communicate, had to endure grevious emotional distress or feel they are unable to even play the game because of the fear of mute abuse are encouraged to collaborate in the collection of evidence for their claims. You are encouraged to put them here and discuss as well.

    This isn't crying, its proactively building a case should i/we not be able to access content without being bullied and abused by other users to the point it impacts our lives or ability to access content for which we payed. Valve should not be facilitating abuse under the guise of trying to prevent it. This is put here as a counterpoint to the severely out of touch 'its for the greater good' and 'take one for the team' mentality around innocent people being harassed with reports in the dev blog.

    Here is the letter to Valve my solicitor helped me create with a few corrections.
    Dear, Valve

    I am now, proactively, in the process of working with an arbitrator and solicitor to build a case around dota2's mute system penalizing innocent individuals and giving them the choice to either not use the product (and thus hats for which you payed) or further endure severe emotional distress. The idea of this would be that being muted gets you further abused by players for not being able to communicate. In addition being unable to communicate beyond simple macros incapacitates an individuals ability to coordinate with team and win.

    My solicitor suggests that it can be argued that valve is guilty of facilitating further harassment from infringing individuals via their penal system. In this case it looks even worse when valve allows infringing individuals to use reports to harass innocent individuals.
    In addition to these arguments my solicitor has suggested that an argument can be made for payed content being inaccessible due to valve forcing individuals to endure emotional damages, including over further reports for not communicating, to access the content and thus are accepting pay for content that they do not effectively provide.

    Should Valve refuse to render appropriate resolution to my mute ban then, due to heavy investment in the game, i am fully ready to work with my solicitor to bring valve to civil suit. We will argue severe emotional distress caused by the secondary effects of an out of control and guilt-blind punishment system and already are collecting evidence toward that end. In addition any and all further harassment because of the mute ban will be recorded and liability will be argued to rest with valve due to them providing the causative factor for it.

    Please save everyone time and work to resolve this situation while its still on a customer/provider basis.

    Sincerely,
    Meiun
    Money is no joke and neither is taking it in return for increasingly difficult to access products.
    In addition making products, accepting money and then making it emotionally injurous to access them is also no joke.

    DoTA1, at the community level, had black lists and white lists for this problem. Really, how hard is that to replicate?

    UPDATE: The specialist for internet harassment said he probably isn't the best choice if i'm aiming for arbitration as the first legal measure and has pointed me in a different direction. Now that its the weekend and i have some time i am working on my Notice of Arbitration and will post a scan of it here maybe in the next 72 hours before waiting to see how things go and mailing it to ATTN: Arbitration Notice, Valve Corporation, P.O. Box 1688, Bellevue, WA 98004. ill probably do that next weekend or the weekend after. Sorry its not 'exciting' or 'fast paced' or whatever but that's how these things are. i want to be careful with every step i take to make sure i do everything right and i've exhausted my options at each step.

    UPDATE 15/5/2013: Why are you all still talking about this? The update system has seen a couple of changes that have fixed some, but not all, of the issues. In practice people who use reports well getting more reports over people who make poor use of them has turned out to somehow fix some of the abuse potential inherent to the system. There are likely still people who get muted despite being innocent but there are far more people being muted for the right reasons now. The only problem i even still have is how much of a pain it is to play with muted players. All of my other complaints hare more or less evaporated with the system as its working 'in the wild'. There's no patch notes about it but it seems the algorithm is a bit more conservative now, if not accurate, as only around 75% of the reports i make now turn into bans (if the popups are to be believed). I have my Notice of Arbitration but there's no real reason to submit it now since valve is fixing things.

    p.s.: after all of the pro-mute posters in this thread had said that everything was fine and dismissed lobby exploits as fixed, the change log included security fixes for lobby bans. really everyone on every side of an argument should take a step back and use some critical thinking to get a better view issues. well it doesn't really impact me so much, but wouldn't it be better if everyone made arguments that weren't so... well wrong?
    Well perhaps it impacts all of us when one side is less willing to talk than the other sides and we cant get an accurate understanding of an issue.


    p.p.s. since people think it wasnt serious from the start here is the notice of arbitration before printing. arbitration.png just never needed to send it.
    Last edited by Meiun; 06-14-2013 at 04:34 PM. Reason: update

  2. #2
    > lawsuit

    No further comments are required.

  3. #3
    Just out of curiosity, did you ask your solicitor, what he thinks are your chances of winning? Given, that its hard to prove emotional damages and the fact that Valve is backed by a law firm from the caliber of Weil, Gotshal & Manges?

  4. #4
    Basic Member TheWilder's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    Czech republic
    Posts
    2,014
    Comedy genius
    Quote Originally Posted by vladhood View Post
    boy im glad all these qualified and educated game designers have come to the forums to help dota 2 grow

  5. #5
    Basic Member
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Location
    Portland, OR
    Posts
    269
    I really hope that you're a troll trying to make people who are actually trying to fix the mute system look bad.

  6. #6
    Basic Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Posts
    56
    This is hilarious. Please post this trial on YouTube. I hate the mute system too but this is too damn funny.

  7. #7
    Basic Member Meiun's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Posts
    185
    Quote Originally Posted by PartialShade View Post
    Just out of curiosity, did you ask your solicitor, what he thinks are your chances of winning? Given, that its hard to prove emotional damages and the fact that Valve is backed by a law firm from the caliber of Weil, Gotshal & Manges?
    Well they said not terrible, but not great either. they actually said that facilitating harassment and emotional damages wouldn't be hard to prove in a civil case, but to expect a settlement or arbitration before even getting to a civil case.
    Currently being referred to a specialist in the field of cyber-bullying and internet based harassment. Having asked about the possibility of 'one person v.s. a large company' they suggested that it just meant that it would be more likely to be resolved before going to the courts.

    Quote Originally Posted by TheWilder View Post
    Comedy genius
    Quote Originally Posted by gordongriest View Post
    I really hope that you're a troll trying to make people who are actually trying to fix the mute system look bad.
    Quote Originally Posted by Propa_Tingz View Post
    This is hilarious. Please post this trial on YouTube. I hate the mute system too but this is too damn funny.
    100% serious and civil trials arent really trials in as such. its legally binding arbitration with a judge going over the arguments from both sides. valve would likely immediately ask it not be recorded, and the judge would probably be averse to it. beyond that why would you even want to watch two people calmly presenting a their interpretation of details to a third person?
    Last edited by Meiun; 06-06-2013 at 12:45 AM.

  8. #8
    Basic Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2013
    Posts
    281
    Quote Originally Posted by Meiun View Post
    Well they said not terrible, but not great either. they actually said that facilitating harassment and emotional damages wouldn't be hard to prove but to expect a settlement or arbitration before even a civil case.
    Currently being referred to a specialist in the field of cyber-bullying and internet based harassment. Having asked about the possiblity of 'one person v.s. a large company' they suggested that it just meant that it would be more likely to be resolved before going to the courts.
    You're only embarrassing yourself by pretending you're serious.

    Unless you're a troll, in which case I commend your commitment to the bit.

  9. #9
    Basic Member Meiun's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Posts
    185
    Quote Originally Posted by spudlyff8fan View Post
    You're only embarrassing yourself by pretending you're serious.

    Unless you're a troll, in which case I commend your commitment to the bit.
    no pretending here. 100% serious. you don't have to like that someone would do this; if you don't have anything useful or on topic to say, why are you here?
    do you really think that solicitors all have retainers in the tends of thousands? do you think that legal fees would add up to any more than would otherwise be spent on first world junk like dota keys and hats? its a few less beers a month, a little less tea and no splurge buying keys. not the biggest deal.

    will update the thread as things go on unless valve removes it, which they might, since you know its for real and its not appropriate or sometimes even legal to constantly divulge the specifics of a civil case.
    Last edited by Meiun; 06-06-2013 at 01:04 AM.

  10. #10
    Quote Originally Posted by Meiun View Post
    Well they said not terrible, but not great either. they actually said that facilitating harassment and emotional damages wouldn't be hard to prove in a civil case, but to expect a settlement or arbitration before even getting to a civil case.
    Currently being referred to a specialist in the field of cyber-bullying and internet based harassment. Having asked about the possibility of 'one person v.s. a large company' they suggested that it just meant that it would be more likely to be resolved before going to the courts.
    I don't have sufficient knowledge on the cyber-bullying cases, but as far as the conventional (real life) emotional damage claims go, it's hard to prove them. The traditional rule is that one cannot recover contract damages for pain and suffering and other psychic losses resulting from the breach: e. g., funeral home breaches contract by losing grandfather's casket; telegraph company mis-delivers message; school reports to your parents by mistake that you have been killed. Courts usually refuse to award contract damages for such emotional distress.

    You can't get emotional distress claims for ordinary breach of commercial contract, building a house, etc. Idea: should not fly into emotional distress here; rather, can mitigate by covering or reselling, avoids loss and emotional distress; also, idea is that some emotional distress is just part of doing business. In your case: you have paid for goods (cosmetics), but since you can't get the full benefits from them, you should resell them on the market.

    Should you go to court (example): We can let the jury place a value on the emotional distress. So in grandfather case, you testify about how dear grandfather was to you, how upset you are, etc.; defense puts on evidence that you never cared for the "old geezer" --as you used to refer to him, as they make you admit on cross-examination.

    You can see that Valve's defence can easily go for your "track record". They'll pull all the chat logs from your games and if you happen to have said one word, that is hinting towards racism, xenophobia or homophobia in your games, you can kiss your case good bye.

    Anyway, good luck with your legal doings with Valve Corporation. I hope you keep us updated, because it is really interesting to see, how will the things unravel.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •