Evony legal fighting fund

I'm glad I wasn't the only one thinking, damn, Cabal, I remember that game.

 

Good times.

 

I don't think we should be banning him. I enjoy these little rows that crop up from time to time on TCE. They're one of the best things about the site. Banning people every time someone goes a bit doolally would make the world a much less interesting place.

It's not like Bruce is posting in every thread on TCE - if someone doesn't want to read about these things then they don't have to click on the thread in question.

 

Maybe I'm too late, but I also don't like Bruce involving TCE in this and dragging it down. TCE is run on goodwill and a shoestring budget, so any hint of legal action against TCE might just make Photon et al to say "Fuck it, we're not up for this, it's not fun anymore" and shut TCE down.

So for this reason, I also vote for Bruce to be banned.

I was going to make a joke about Bruce here, but my lawyer has advised against it.

 

Are you ever going to share how much money you collected? And how exactly it's going to be spent?

What if Evony drop the whole thing, are you going to pay people back?

Also, and I think it's a perfectly reasonable question, how much money have you put into the fund yourself?

 

I have put in more than everyone else put together.
The money is going to the solicitor.
If it is not used it will be repaid.
One donor told me to spend his contribution on beer instead of solicitors!

Anyhow I just wrote about this today:

I would like to say a big thank you to all the many people who have contributed to this fund, I have been more than pleasantly surprised by the response. Every amount, no matter small, will help, it all adds up. And whilst I am truly appreciative of everyone’s generosity I have actually been shocked at how much some people are willing to donate to this cause.
There are several issues at stake here. The first is libel tourism. Earlier this year Evony were very pleased to repeatedly post this (I have the screen grabs as evidence): “Evony is owned by UMGE (Universal Multiplayer Game Entertainment). Founded by a small group of avid Chinese game developers, UMGE is based in Guangzhou, China and develops online multiplayer games.” Then on July 22 this year (after I wrote the articles they object to) they formed a Delaware company, Evony LLC. This company is now suing me for libel in Sydney, Australia whilst I live in Coventry, England.
If this case is allowed to proceed it will create a precedent and open the floodgates for anyone to litigate anywhere against anyone they don’t like. It will stifle all our freedoms because the rich guy will always have the upper hand and will be able to choose the country with the most punitive laws.
The second issue is reputation management. Unlike the print media, that our libel laws were designed for, online content can be unpublished, ie removed. So now a huge legal industry has sprung up where authors are threatened with libel action unless they remove content that the person paying the solicitor objects to, whether it is the truth or not. Obviously the authors invariably remove the content, such is the massive cost of defending a libel action. So the internet is being massively censored, usually by the people who have something to hide that we should know about.
The third issue is just plain freedom of speech, the foundation of our democratic society. What I wrote about Evony was the truth and fair comment. This supposedly American company has not acted against me in America, they would be laughed out of court because of the Constitutional protection of free speech. However British libel law was designed to protect the rich from the gossip of their servants. And it is an extension of this British law that is in force in Australia. What this means is that Evony can make many strange and outrageous claims against me and I have to go to great lengths to disprove every single one in court, to the satisfaction of a jury. This obviously puts me at a massive disadvantage in the case.
The fourth issue is Evony itself. I don’t like the way that you can buy in game achievements, the way they are constantly badgering players for money, that the game exposes young people to online gambling, the fact that this blog (and others) were comment spammed repeatedly and I don’t like their risque bait and switch advertising. There is much more not to like but I don’t want to add to the list of things that I have to prove in court!
And the amazing thing is that I have actually caused them no harm whatsoever. When I wrote my article less than a million people had joined the game. In the few short months since that has risen to over ten million. Admittedly most of those have since left the game, for obvious reasons. So it looks like the old adage that there is no such thing as bad publicity is true. It seems very likely that my writing has driven more people to go and try the game. In other words I have had the opposite effect that they are claiming.

 

My hero.

 

For the moment you only accept payments via PayPal, right? The payments go directly to bruce@everiss.com, right? So you're telling me that you sent yourself money? Paid yourself on-line by putting your own credit card details to pay yourself?

I don't believe you.

If the paypal account was on someone else's name, like the solicitor, maybe that would sound believable. At the moment you're telling me you moved money from your left to your right pocket.

 

You really are a prize tit aren't you?

I sent my contribution by direct bank transfer.

 

To yourself? Because at the moment you seem to be dealing with the incoming money.

 

You are just being daft and looking for lulz.
Obviously I sent the money to my solicitors in Australia.
Why would I send money to myself?

 

Correct me if I'm wrong, but I had the impression that the fund is a "just-in-case" thing. Why would you send money, or collect money, for that purpose now?

I feel very uncomfortable with people sending you money directly for a legal battle that may or may not happen.

 

How much was donated in total? I see no reason why the giving public shouldn't be told.

 

Indeed, the whole thing should completely transparent. How much was donated and where the money is sitting. Otherwise expecting people to trust you just on good faith is moronic.

 

Next you will want the name and email address of each donor.

As you haven't given anything your right to know is zero.

 

Nobody asked for names, just a total.

Is there a reason for keeping the total a secret?

 

I refer you to my previous answer.

All donors of more than £10 will be kept in the loop.

 

It doesn't say that anywhere on your fund page. So someone who only donates £5 doesn't deserve to be in the loop? Is this some kind of incentive to donate more? Why do I get if I donate £20? A chance to win a yacht?

 

While you may be quite entitled to not declare where the money's going or how much there is (because they are after all personal donations to you, not payment to the lawyers for work), not doing so just reeks. Maybe that's not a problem for you.

 

...except that personal donations to you are taxable.