The Ur-Quan Masters Home Page Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
August 19, 2019, 12:14:09 pm
Home Help Search Login Register
News: Paul & Fred have reached a settlement with Stardock!

+  The Ur-Quan Masters Discussion Forum
|-+  The Ur-Quan Masters Re-Release
| |-+  General UQM Discussion (Moderator: Death 999)
| | |-+  My take on Stardock
« previous next »
Pages: 1 ... 25 26 [27] 28 29 ... 68 Print
Author Topic: My take on Stardock  (Read 61304 times)
Frogboy
*Many bubbles*
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 231



View Profile
Re: My take on Stardock
« Reply #390 on: April 08, 2018, 06:03:26 pm »

If the moderators have a problem with me pointing out how obnoxious your pretend lawyer posts are then Iíd just leave.

I donít necessarily agree with the tone of svsís posts but I agree with the substance.  When I said you were obtuse, I used that word not as an insult but as a carefully picked descriptor.  

When you post high level opinions, thatís fine. What gets you into trouble is that you make legal conclusions.  

To use a programming analogy, you write a bunch of C-like gobblygook and insist it will compile and when someone who knows how to program tells you itís gobblygook you start demanding that they walk you through your various lines of pseudo-code.  Itís impossible because you donít even have the basics down.What makes your posts damaging is that to a lay person, they can come across as credible because hey, you seem to be using a C-like syntax.

Itís kind of like when you watch a movie that covers your area of expertise and they completely botch it but people walk out thinking ďoh yea, they could totally hack that computer that way...Ē simply because they used jargon that sounded right.

Logged
Zanthius
Enlightened
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 919



View Profile
Re: My take on Stardock
« Reply #391 on: April 08, 2018, 06:17:21 pm »

Itís kind of like when you watch a movie that covers your area of expertise and they completely botch it but people walk out thinking ďoh yea, they could totally hack that computer that way...Ē simply because they used jargon that sounded right.

Elestan seems like a rather intelligent/reasonable person, and I am sure that if you presented him with clear reasons about why he is wrong, he would understand and accept that.

If you think that experts always are right, maybe you should read this article:

Experts vs. Dart-Throwing Chimps



It is based upon the research to a guy that won the noble prize in economics, due to his research into cognitive biases. So if an appeal to authority is your best argument, there you have it.
« Last Edit: April 08, 2018, 06:20:19 pm by Zanthius » Logged
Frogboy
*Many bubbles*
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 231



View Profile
Re: My take on Stardock
« Reply #392 on: April 08, 2018, 06:24:28 pm »

It's not about an appeal to authority.  It is most definitely not in my best interest to walk him through all the ways he is wrong.

Having spent most of my adult life having to be involved in some type of IP related litigation (and this is the first time we initiated a suit) I've gotten more than my fair share of first hand experience on how this works.

So what would I point out to him? Everything.  Every legal conclusion I've seem him post is wrong. Even ones that favor us.  When this is all over in a few years, I will try to make a point of explaining the multiple flaws in every argument he's made and why they make no sense.

Logged
Zanthius
Enlightened
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 919



View Profile
Re: My take on Stardock
« Reply #393 on: April 08, 2018, 06:31:09 pm »

It's not about an appeal to authority.  It is most definitely not in my best interest to walk him through all the ways he is wrong.

Well, if you just showed him a few of the most important ways he is wrong, it would certainly seem to be more in your interest than to argue in this way....
Logged
Elestan
*Smell* controller
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 419



View Profile
Re: My take on Stardock
« Reply #394 on: April 08, 2018, 06:41:25 pm »

When this is all over in a few years, I will try to make a point of explaining the multiple flaws in every argument he's made and why they make no sense.

I'll look forward to it.  Just please keep in mind that I will be revising my opinions continuously as I learn more from the amended pleadings, new discovery, and (eventually) the court's rulings.  Hopefully I will have corrected many of the flaws myself by the time this is over.
Logged
Frogboy
*Many bubbles*
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 231



View Profile
Re: My take on Stardock
« Reply #395 on: April 08, 2018, 06:42:41 pm »

Opinions are fine. Legal conclusions are less fine.
Logged
Lakstoties
Frungy champion
**
Offline Offline

Posts: 66



View Profile
Re: My take on Stardock
« Reply #396 on: April 08, 2018, 06:47:20 pm »

To use a programming analogy, you write a bunch of C-like gobblygook and insist it will compile and when someone who knows how to program tells you itís gobblygook you start demanding that they walk you through your various lines of pseudo-code.  Itís impossible because you donít even have the basics down.What makes your posts damaging is that to a lay person, they can come across as credible because hey, you seem to be using a C-like syntax.

The sign of a true expert is someone willing to educate one about the basics and explain the issues accurately with their expert knowledge, hence demonstrating their proficiency and showing what was wrong in one's assumptions.  When you refuse to do so because someone "cannot understand due to their lack of knowledge", then you do a disservice to everyone by purposefully leaving them in ignorance and you do a disservice to yourself by not exercising your knowledge when it could highlight the purpose of your  knowledge and value of such in society.  The sharing of this knowledge by an expert can help aid the expert in keeping their knowledge relevant and up to date via discovery of contradictions or changes that have happened since the knowledge was last exercised.

I am a computer scientist by training and I have never withheld my knowledge from anyone because I thought they wouldn't understand.  I have spent hours educating those who are willing about the concepts I have learned and took considerable effort to relate them in different manners, examples, and methods to remedy their ignorance.  Through that process both parties have always been enriched.

So, I do not understand this hording of knowledge over others to demean their honest quest to understand the situation.  There are people who are trying comprehend this situation to the best of their abilities and in the face of their honest struggle...  Supposed experts sit by and do nothing.  A situation has arisen to justify past efforts to acquire the experience and knowledge... and such is just being withheld, seemingly, contemptuously.

This is a great opportunity to garner goodwill and understanding of a position, but instead there is standoff and dismissal.
Logged
Krulle
Enlightened
*****
Offline Offline

Gender: Male
Posts: 1009


*Hurghi*! Krulle is *spitting* again!


View Profile
Re: My take on Stardock
« Reply #397 on: April 08, 2018, 07:00:09 pm »

And pick one single line of the code, and tell them how a Ccode line would look like.

e.g. variable dfinition and initial value setting:
byte z; z=25;
should be
byte z=25;




Again, the 1988 agreement. The interpretation does not require much knowledge of law, as the agreement is self-sufficient.
How is Elestan's conclusion that the licensing agreement regarding selling/distribution of the games has ended wrong?
Since I came to the same conclusion (independently), I would love to know which assumption I did wrong, which illogical step I thought was logical,...

Well, Frogboy should not answer that, as this might publish Stardocks intended reasoning, but svs is free to comment on it.
Logged
Elestan
*Smell* controller
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 419



View Profile
Re: My take on Stardock
« Reply #398 on: April 08, 2018, 07:04:49 pm »

Opinions are fine. Legal conclusions are less fine.

Everything I'm writing here is opinion.  Anything that sounds like a conclusion is just my current opinion on what conclusion I think fits best, based on my limited knowledge.  If you want to change my opinion, you can give me better information.  Or you can just listen and laugh to yourself at how embarrassed I'll be when the court case inevitably reveals the flaws in my thinking.  But repeatedly making non-specific attacks on me isn't going to accomplish anything except wasting people's time - and being a CEO, your time is probably at a higher billing rate than anyone else's here.
Logged
tingkagol
Frungy champion
**
Offline Offline

Posts: 50



View Profile
Re: My take on Stardock
« Reply #399 on: April 08, 2018, 07:11:51 pm »

e]...and at this point, you've stepped over the line into ad hominem, and violated the posting rules of this forum.

Straw man argument, sir.

I'm glad to see you are acquainted with argumentative fallacies such as the Straw Man.  Let me point you to another, The Courtier's Reply:
Quote from: Wikipedia
...in which a respondent to criticism dismisses the arguments of the critic by claiming that the critic lacks sufficient knowledge, credentials, or training to credibly comment on the subject matter..

Frogboy has twice tried to use this tactic against me here, and I asked the moderators not to take action against him for it, because I genuinely want to hear his perspectives.  But it's getting a little old, and having more people launching baseless attacks does not help the conversation.  If you want to provide constructive criticism or an entirely different well-reasoned perspective, I would welcome it, but otherwise, it would be best if you were not here.
There's an abundance of ad hominem here lately. From outright dismissing the opinions of out-of-nowhere newbies and Elestan's lack of a law degree*. The person/originator does not matter. Attack the opinion not the person.

* just found out about the "courtier" fallacy. Thanks.
Logged
Frogboy
*Many bubbles*
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 231



View Profile
Re: My take on Stardock
« Reply #400 on: April 08, 2018, 07:19:14 pm »

I am withholding my knowledge for what should be self-evident reasons.  This isn't an academic exercise for us.  

Over the next 2 or 3 years you will be able to read documents on this on Pacer and look at how things got ruled on and the actual arguments made by actual lawyers.

Logged
Frogboy
*Many bubbles*
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 231



View Profile
Re: My take on Stardock
« Reply #401 on: April 08, 2018, 07:25:22 pm »

Quote
There's an abundance of ad hominem here lately.

Lately? Check out the very first page of this thread.

It sometimes comes across that there are two sets of rules here.
Logged
Zanthius
Enlightened
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 919



View Profile
Re: My take on Stardock
« Reply #402 on: April 08, 2018, 08:40:55 pm »

I am withholding my knowledge for what should be self-evident reasons.  This isn't an academic exercise for us.  

Over the next 2 or 3 years you will be able to read documents on this on Pacer and look at how things got ruled on and the actual arguments made by actual lawyers.

Okay, but why are you here at all then? It doesn't seem to serve much purpose to come here to tell others about how wrong they are without actually telling them how they are wrong.
Logged
Frogboy
*Many bubbles*
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 231



View Profile
Re: My take on Stardock
« Reply #403 on: April 08, 2018, 08:57:14 pm »

I am withholding my knowledge for what should be self-evident reasons.  This isn't an academic exercise for us.  

Over the next 2 or 3 years you will be able to read documents on this on Pacer and look at how things got ruled on and the actual arguments made by actual lawyers.

Okay, but why are you here at all then? It doesn't seem to serve much purpose to come here to tell others about how wrong they are without actually telling them how they are wrong.

Then why are you here?

Edit:  I think I have contributed a lot to a discussion that most lawyers would tell you that I shouldn't be contributing at all.  But I value communicating with the community more than an optimal legal strategy.  But naturally, there are limitations.

There is a big difference between someone having an opinion and someone making a legal conclusion.  I haven't had a problem with anything Krulle's writing whereas Elestan tends to write as if he's some sort of arbiter waiting for others to make legal arguments to him in order to post his legal conclusion when he's no more qualified to discuss it than my daughter.

In a deposition, it is actually a no-no to ask a witness to make a legal conclusion. 

Ok to ask: "Did he hit you?"

Not ok to ask: "Do he commit assault?"

This particular dispute has a complicated part and a not complicated part.  The 1988 agreement is complicated.  The trademark part is not.

The follow-up question would be: Why is one complicated and the other is not? It's because each contract is unique and there are laws upon laws that govern the myriad of little bits.  By contrast, there are very clear, thoroughly litigated rules in place on trademarks.   The 1988 contract has never been litigated on.  Trademark infringement cases, by contrast, have been thousands upon thousands of times.










« Last Edit: April 08, 2018, 11:10:40 pm by Frogboy » Logged
Zanthius
Enlightened
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 919



View Profile
Re: My take on Stardock
« Reply #404 on: April 08, 2018, 09:08:50 pm »

In summary, I haven't seen a single post that looks like it was written by an actual lawyer who has any understanding of the applicable laws and I have read a whole lot of application of faulty knowledge of the law to facts that have been hand-selected by each of the respective parties.

I kinda agree with you that I think this is a wasted conversation. We cannot necessarily (or shouldn't necessarily) make a trial here on this forum. This is why I haven't been so involved in this conversation. However, if other people feel like they want to have this conversation, they should of course be allowed to. Just because I think this is a wasted conversation, it doesn't necessarily mean that I have any right to deny other people to have this conversation.

Anyhow. All conversations in this forum should have a certain level of intellectual probity I guess.
« Last Edit: April 08, 2018, 09:17:59 pm by Zanthius » Logged
Pages: 1 ... 25 26 [27] 28 29 ... 68 Print 
« previous next »
Jump to:  


Login with username, password and session length

Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!