Nu-TSR suing WotC: Schadenfreude is back on the menu, boys!

Best Selling RPGs - Available Now @ DriveThruRPG.com

xanther

Legendary Member
Joined
Jan 6, 2018
Messages
2,135
Reaction score
2,992
The thing is, I don't think they actually get what it is that people find offensive about what they've written; they leap straight to "bad word upset liberals" rather than understanding the concepts which make the word bad. To mangle the traditional free speech example, if you told them "don't say fire in a crowded theatre unless there actually is one", they'd consider the word "fire" to be the thing folk objected to, not the underlying concept "don't use words that might cause a panic when you're in a small space and people could get hurt in the ensuing chaos".

Most of us could write something twice as bigoted and with actual plausible deniability, because we understand the actual things that are problems, rather than just the surface-level stuff.
Yep...makes me think this stuff is just fine by them and what those around them believe to be just self evident and not racist at all to them...who has the low intelligence and wisdom scores here? Sadly have had plenty of experiencing growing up around people like that. So this stuff isn't some elaborate ironic or troll motivated solely by grift but likely genuinely held beliefs and a game for others like them...the trolling and grift is just gravy
 

Black Leaf

And we'll fly away on those angel wings of chrome
Super Moderator
Moderator
Joined
Aug 20, 2017
Messages
5,939
Reaction score
16,207
Tenkar has filed his counterclaim to LaNasa's personal injury suit.

LaNasa's suit for context - https://unicourt.com/case/pc-db5-lanasa-et-al-v-stiene-1298655

He's claiming that Tenkar is responsible for the LaNasa family going into therapy. I don't have the original document for Tenkar's reply (send plz) but EnWorld have helpfully provided us with some highlights.

-----
This lawsuit stems from Plaintiff Lanasa’s conscious involvement in public controversy (e.g.,
as a public figure repeatedly running for public office), engagement in myriad forms of inappropriate
conduct, and invitation attention from the public and Defendant (e.g., by publicly harassing Defendant
and, upon information and belief, mailing feces to Defendant’s home). Such conduct by Plaintiff
Lanasa also includes distribution of reprehensible racist materials, open affiliation with individuals
who publicly disseminate vile pro-Nazi and white supremacist materials, and other forms of conduct
that we respectfully submit render Plaintiffs defamation-proof. Naturally, the internet is replete with
criticism of Plaintiff Lanasa’s conduct, a small portion of which comprises criticism of Plaintiffs by
Defendant. Although Defendant has endured extensive and patently-actionable misconduct by
Plaintiffs, Defendant would prefer to refrain from burdening the Court with disagreements between
the parties, move to dismiss this meritless action with prejudice, and get on with his life.
-----

-----
DEFAMATION
Plaintiffs’ defamation claims fall within New York’s recently-amended anti-SLAPP law,(2) and
because Plaintiff Lanasa is, at minimum, a limited-purpose public figure, Plaintiffs must plausibly
allege Defendant acted with actual malice to sustain their claim.(3) A defamation complaint “us[ing]
actual-malice buzzwords” that are not “backed by well-pled facts” cannot survive a motion to dismiss. (4)
Plaintiffs’ defamation per se claims, e.g., one passing reference to “criminal history” also do not
constitute any of the “four types of statements . . . per se actionable under New York law: those that
‘imput[e] unchastity to a woman,’ assert that a plaintiff has a ‘loathsome disease,’ tend to injure him in
his profession, or charge a plaintiff with a serious crime.” (5) Statements that “fail to portray . . . a serious
crime” are not “per se actionable.”(6) Because Plaintiffs have failed to plead any facts that, even if true,
could establish Defendant made any statement about any Plaintiff that was defamatory, known to be
false, and/or made while entertaining serious doubts regarding its truth, Plaintiffs defamation claims
must be dismissed.(7) “Truth” is also “an absolute defense to an action based on defamation.” (8) To the
extent Plaintiff Lanasa attempts to characterize a passing reference to “criminal history” as
defamatory, Defendant avers, upon information and belief, that Plaintiff Lanasa has been convicted
of at least one crime. Finally, Defendant plans to invoke “the libel-proof plaintiff doctrine,” which
applies when “there is little or no harm to a plaintiff’s already low reputation,” in which case, “the
claim should be dismissed.”
-----

As for future activity on this suit, Tenkar's lawyer proposes a schedule that would see more paperwork be filed in December, with the next (first?) hearing with the judge on Jan 23, 2023.

It's hard to pick a favourite part from "we are willing to put on the record that we have good reason to believe LaNasa sends poo through the postal system" to "LaNasa is such a prick that it is impossible to affect his reputation negatively".

I adore the libel-proof plaintiff doctrine and it's good to see a rare case of it in the wild.
 

TristramEvans

The Right Hand of Doom
Administrator
Moderator
Joined
Apr 24, 2017
Messages
29,811
Reaction score
84,219
I adore the libel-proof plaintiff doctrine and it's good to see a rare case of it in the wild.

If I'm reading that correctly, the argument is that La Nasa's reputation is already so low that anything less than a false accusation of a serious crime cannot be considered libel? That's hilarious (and true - I mean what could anyone say to top what LaNasa has published in his fake Star Frontiers document?)
 

Black Leaf

And we'll fly away on those angel wings of chrome
Super Moderator
Moderator
Joined
Aug 20, 2017
Messages
5,939
Reaction score
16,207
If I'm reading that correctly, the argument is that La Nasa's reputation is already so low that anything less than a false accusation of a serious crime cannot be considered libel? That's hilarious (and true - I mean what could anyone say to top what LaNasa has published in his fake Star Frontiers document?)
That is literally the legal argument being used. Previously I've only heard of it used in cases involving major criminals.
 

opaopajr

Legendary Member
Joined
May 4, 2017
Messages
1,865
Reaction score
2,746
... and we have entered Pink Flamingos territory. :crap::present::shock:


I am pretty sure if they pursue USPS mailing restrictions violations they could have an easier legal case. But at this point it is the better part of valor to watch safely from a distance. :crossed: :hurry:

edit: Oh wait! Happy Thanksgiving, everybody! :thumbsup::eat:
 

Marshal Lucky

Well-Known Member
Joined
Sep 9, 2019
Messages
136
Reaction score
235
Tenkar has filed his counterclaim to LaNasa's personal injury suit.

LaNasa's suit for context - https://unicourt.com/case/pc-db5-lanasa-et-al-v-stiene-1298655

He's claiming that Tenkar is responsible for the LaNasa family going into therapy. I don't have the original document for Tenkar's reply (send plz) but EnWorld have helpfully provided us with some highlights.



It's hard to pick a favourite part from "we are willing to put on the record that we have good reason to believe LaNasa sends poo through the postal system" to "LaNasa is such a prick that it is impossible to affect his reputation negatively".

I adore the libel-proof plaintiff doctrine and it's good to see a rare case of it in the wild.

The most famous example in America being the William Shockley libel case. Shockley was a famous physicist and a dedicated white supremacist who was obsessed with human breeding. When a reporter from an Atlanta newspaper likened his crank beliefs to the eugenics program of the Nazis, Shockley sued. He "won" the case in that he proved he wasn't actually a Nazi, but he was awarded ONE DOLLAR (no legal fees or punitive damages either) on the grounds that while strictly speaking, he wasn't a Nazi, his views were so vile and so racist that his reputation was almost worthless. Apparently, the jury chose $1 because it was the only judgement that could have possibly been more humiliating than just finding against him.
 
Cthulhu Mythos - Available Now @ DriveThruRPG.com
Top