Wheee!! [H] has finally managed to piss off FutureMark.
- Thread starter Ostsol
- Start date
- Status
Ostsol said:
Their have been limitations placed on the first 1st amendment one of them is
You should find something like that in this http://frwebgate6.access.gpo.gov/cg...ocID=1122978832+0+0+0&WAISaction=retrieve
I guess kyle could try to get the previous ruling of the superium court overruled but fat chance. Does any of his statements consitute defamation I dunno and frankly I don't care.
IMO I think Kyle is entitled to bitch or wax lyrical about anything as often as he wants on his own website as long as some kind of reason(s) for doing so is provided. If not (i.e. no reason provided), then this would be bordering on compulsive obsessive behaviour where no real reasons are required or can be explained.
Of course, you don't see me bitching about something like 3DMark05's "DST+PCF-enabled-by-default" on B3D's front page because we/B3D have an unwritten rule/policy about what can be considered front page material.
Of course, you don't see me bitching about something like 3DMark05's "DST+PCF-enabled-by-default" on B3D's front page because we/B3D have an unwritten rule/policy about what can be considered front page material.
DukenukemX
Newcomer
bloodbob said:
I haven't been able to find that quote on that site.
It's hard to define "damaging reporting". It's one thing to say "3DMark sucks and just don't use it" but [H] has explained why they feel the benchmark sucks. For some people here it's either not good enough or 3DMark has nothing to do with PC games and is just a benchmark.
If you can't say anything bad then whats the point of talking?
Imagine if you're one of those IBM hard drives owners who had it fail and now you wanna say all kinds of bad things about the product. Which is why Hitachi owns IBMs HD business.
Anyone can say something good about anything. It's the people who talk sh*t who have serious kahunas.
I wasn't saying that [H] did or did not slander FutureMark. Since FutureMark used the word, though, it is up to them to prove it. To clarify: FutureMark must show that [H] used false or misleading information to damage the credibility or reputation of FutureMark or one of their products.DukenukemX said:It's hard to define "damaging reporting". It's one thing to say "3DMark sucks and just don't use it" but [H] has explained why they feel the benchmark sucks. For some people here it's either not good enough or 3DMark has nothing to do with PC games and is just a benchmark.
If you can't say anything bad then whats the point of talking?
Imagine if you're one of those IBM hard drives owners who had it fail and now you wanna say all kinds of bad things about the product. Which is why Hitachi owns IBMs HD business.
Anyone can say something good about anything. It's the people who talk sh*t who have serious kahunas.
I don't have any particular opinion as to who is in the right. I got annoyed at [H]'s bitching a long time ago, so it's a rare moment when I read any of their anti-FutureMark/Infinium Labs/whatever articles.
Am I the only one noticing that, apparently, every other hardware tech site is capable of expressing opinion without inciting litigation? I don't know which side has more legal grounds, but it does seem that [H] should learn something about responsibility in journalism.
And they should not learn from the NY Times or Dan Rather.
And they should not learn from the NY Times or Dan Rather.
Is it necessary for such comments/jokes to continue? This is getting tiresome and getting on my nerves. If you (and others) don't read the front page, fine. B3D is not a news site. Note the kind of stuff we post on the front page and think about why we have such "limitations" on news posting.bloodbob said:
I mean, it is quite obvious to B3D that our forums is the major attraction to some. B3D's "official voice" is either on the front page or in its articles/reviews/previews/etc. and it is important to us that we have avenues for expressing ourselves officially. I actually regard our front page and our official content (not the forum) as more important.
To all : Please stop with the "B3D has a front page?" comments/jokes. It is getting irritating to me. Thanks.
IgnorancePersonified
Regular
It's not all going kyles way. This is publicity for both parties. That's what kyles in it for. Negative publicity is sometimes as good as positive publicity.
I mean - does everybody listen to the deep south hick or is it just kids??
I did think FM's reply was rather childish though.... If that's the way they carry on then it seems clear why they became THE 3D football of 2003.
I mean - does everybody listen to the deep south hick or is it just kids??
I did think FM's reply was rather childish though.... If that's the way they carry on then it seems clear why they became THE 3D football of 2003.
Hellbinder
Banned
I think you guys may want to study the law a little more.
This is not a "Free country" where the "1st amendment" grants you to "say or print anything you like".
Yes in an editorial or an opinion piece you can get Quite Creative. However there are still things called SLANDER and LIBEL. In our law. If Futuremark can Show that As a public news service, that [H] statements of "opinion" contain specific facts that can be proven untrue. Then They can and likely WILL be Sued for Defamation.
Here is a specific Definition
Here is another Quote of interest...
I think it can be fairly easily proven that [H] has crossed the line on more than one occasion. Much of Kyles statements are derogatory and fit the Legal Qualifications directly.. Moreso he has made statements in more than one instance with innacurate information.
Personally, as much as i like [H] new review process i think he has gone waaay overboard on this and i hope he gets his rear sued into the ground.
Wich trust me gentleman... is going to happen here.
This is not a "Free country" where the "1st amendment" grants you to "say or print anything you like".
Yes in an editorial or an opinion piece you can get Quite Creative. However there are still things called SLANDER and LIBEL. In our law. If Futuremark can Show that As a public news service, that [H] statements of "opinion" contain specific facts that can be proven untrue. Then They can and likely WILL be Sued for Defamation.
Here is a specific Definition
Here is another Quote of interest...
I think it can be fairly easily proven that [H] has crossed the line on more than one occasion. Much of Kyles statements are derogatory and fit the Legal Qualifications directly.. Moreso he has made statements in more than one instance with innacurate information.
Personally, as much as i like [H] new review process i think he has gone waaay overboard on this and i hope he gets his rear sued into the ground.
Wich trust me gentleman... is going to happen here.
Hellbinder
Banned
This is pretty far from a laughable lawsuit.geo said:
3dmark can prove its value and its accuracy.. and they can *easily* demostrate that Kyle has defamed them and with specific cases of innacurate information.
And brent follows kyle into the whole futuremark bashing bullshit.
I used to think brent was alight, but if he can't be his own man stand up against kyle, I feel no pity for him.
Since he seems to be more in the know, I assume he is either just as bad as kyle, or just blindly following him.
Either way hardocp= not gonna win any popularity contests imo, I think this will draw more negative press than postive, since like someone said, hes doin the same thing he did with IF, but futuremark isn't guilty of anything but offering software to HELP evaluate graphics performance, its not like they force anybody to use it
And didnt one of the tests in 3dmark 03 show how the R420 performed in Doom3? The NV40 seems to be faster, just like in doom3.
I used to think brent was alight, but if he can't be his own man stand up against kyle, I feel no pity for him.
Since he seems to be more in the know, I assume he is either just as bad as kyle, or just blindly following him.
Either way hardocp= not gonna win any popularity contests imo, I think this will draw more negative press than postive, since like someone said, hes doin the same thing he did with IF, but futuremark isn't guilty of anything but offering software to HELP evaluate graphics performance, its not like they force anybody to use it
And didnt one of the tests in 3dmark 03 show how the R420 performed in Doom3? The NV40 seems to be faster, just like in doom3.
- Status
