Evony threaten to sue me to suppress the truth.

Yeah, that'd be bad, wouldn't it Bruce

 

Tim owns Evony?????
OMG!!!!

 

Lol. I'm sure I remember you being hauled for up for using someone's (c) art for one of your blog pieces, denying it was and issue and then silently deleting it off your site

 

But what Evony are doing is attempting to destroy evidence in a New South Wales Supreme Court case.

 

.

 

DELETING IS NOTHING LIKE DESTROYING.

 

Sorry Silvery, but for digital information, legally speaking, deleting data is destroying data.

Backups and trace data left on drives (where the data has been marked empty but not written over yet) is not considered in the act of verifying if data has been destroyed from a specific source.

 

I know.

 

I want to kill every one of them. For giving them the money to spam me with their pathetic tits and ass adverts.
That is all.

 

Just get AdBlock, you nutter.

 

Does anyone have a contact with the legal department at Microsoft HQ?

Please PM me if you do.

 

According to their own Wiki UMGE are the people behind Evony: 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.

UMGE are named as defendants by Microsoft in a big click fraud case:



So this comment posted to my blog is very interesting:

Here is a copy of the lawsuit
http://graphics8.nytimes.com/packages/pdf/business/LamComplaint.pdf
As you can see there are ten counts. These include:
1. Breach of contract;
2. Breach of implied covenant of good faith and fair dealings;
3. Tortious interference with business relationships;
4. Fraudulent inducement
5. Fraudulent misrepresentation
6. Computer Fraud and Abuse Act
7. Washington Computer Spyware Act
8. Washington Consumer Protection Act
9. Civil conspiracy
10. Unjust enrichment
Mr Everiss has claimed that Evony (Associated with the defendants, but concealed due to the alleged civil conspiracy) are the “bad boys” of the internet. This is an understatement given the claims made of them by Microsoft’s attorneys. It is also worth pointing out that Mircosoft are actually representing the consumers here, namely every lawful person that uses the internet.
However, if you read the lawsuit carefully, you will note that Microsoft continues to be irreparably damaged by the defendants’ conduct, and has no adequate means at law. I would read this as implying that because the transactions are international Microsoft are unable to protect consumers or itself against this form of corruption. This might explain as to why Evony is keen to see that all forms of media back down from drawing attention to itself, because the media can bring this matter to public attention where law cannot.
China, the United States, Australia and the United Kingdom are all signatories to the United Nations Convention Against Corruption (UNCAC) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Nations_Convention_against_Corruption. This will mean that the libel lawsuit served on Mr Everiss by the defendants in the Mircrosoft lawsuit may constitute as additional evidence to demonstrate that corruption has transpired.
As the libel action against Mr Everiss was issued in Australia it might be advisable to visit the Australian Attorney-General’s website http://www.ag.gov.au/. If one types in UNCAC on this website search it is possible to see the stance that Australia takes on issues pertaining to corruption. Should Microsoft win their litigation, which is extremely likely, then Mr Everiss may be able to instigate corruption charges against Australia with the assistance of the Microsoft ruling on the basis that New South Wales has been permitted to create legislation that allows registered Australian law firms to threaten people and organisations with libel around the world for reporting criminal and unlawful conduct, as can be freely demonstrated within Microsoft’s lawsuit. In this respect Mr Everiss appears to have excellent grounds for a counterclaim, and possibly a large one at that because an Australian law firm appears to has made itself party to civil conspiracy.
This matter may be of interest to Franny Armstrong of Spannerfilms http://www.spannerfilms.net/. The reason being is that she is the one that documented and filmed the McLibel case. In this respect this could be known as “Your libel awaits you in the Australian outback, my Lord.”
Here is wishing Mr Everiss every success in pursuing this important matter that may have international public interest value. He is in the best position to spearhead the news on his libel case and I applaud his commitment to the legitimate gaming industry.

 

Have you made Microsofts legal department aware of this libel suit? Make sure they are on the same page, you'll definitely want some corporate backing if your going to try and take down an international corruption ring.

 

This is precisely why I asked the earlier question.

Our industry really, really doesn't need these people.

 

Well, My 2p worth:

• Evony are cocks.
• Evony's legal dept. are cocks.
• Evony the game is shit.
• Evony claiming "World's Best Web Game" is bollocks.

gl Bruce.