PC Gaming

9112 readers

1032 users here now

For PC gaming news and discussion. PCGamingWiki

Rules:

Be Respectful.
No Spam or Porn.
No Advertising.
No Memes.
No Tech Support.
No questions about buying/building computers.
No game suggestions, friend requests, surveys, or begging.
No Let's Plays, streams, highlight reels/montages, random videos or shorts.
No off-topic posts/comments, within reason.
Use the original source, no clickbait titles, no duplicates. (Submissions should be from the original source if possible, unless from paywalled or non-english sources. If the title is clickbait or lacks context you may lightly edit the title.)

founded 2 years ago

MODERATORS

[email protected]

188

A summer intern once saved Valve from a near-fatal lawsuit after a publisher 'decided to go World War 3' on it, and it all hinged on one email (www.pcgamer.com)

submitted 2 months ago by [email protected] to c/[email protected]

17 comments fedilink hide all child comments

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] [email protected] 100 points 2 months ago (7 children)

In a bit of malicious compliance, Vivendi turned over millions of pages of Korean language documents from its local subsidiary during the discovery phase of Valve's cybercafe lawsuit, with anything potentially useful to Valve buried under both the volume of material and a language barrier. Quackenbush turned to a summer intern identified only as "Andrew" in the documentary. A native Korean speaker who also majored in Korean language studies in college, Andrew found the needle in the haystack: An email where one Korean Vivendi executive discussed the destruction of documents related to the Valve case to their superior, with the implication that the more junior executive was ordered to do so. With this evidence in hand, Valve was able to turn the tables on Vivendi, securing a highly favorable settlement and full ownership of its IP moving forward.

It's not clear to me how the email described was helpful though?

[–] [email protected] 127 points 2 months ago (6 children)

Destroying evidence is a big no-no in a legal case, and would allow the judge to draw a negative inference, so I'm guessing that gave Valve the leverage to settle the case.

[–] [email protected] 19 points 2 months ago (5 children)

Destroying evidence is a big no-no in a legal case, and would allow the judge to draw a negative inference, so I'm guessing that gave Valve the leverage to settle the case.

Ah, that would make sense. So Valve probably won more on procedural grounds then?

"Needle in a haystack" made me assume it was something like actual contractual language forbidding Vivendi from doing what it was trying to do.

[–] thedirtyknapkin 56 points 2 months ago

i mean, destroying evidence related to the case is a little more than a "procedural violation". that's clear cut obstruction and it's a felony crime.

load more comments (4 replies)