So, how many Ls is this for Rooster Teeth in 2019? I'm not trying to advocate them getting a thread of their own, but the ways they've managed to piss off the fans who don't kiss their shoes and the ground they walk on, and the number of them, is just staggering.
This is the reason Van Halen started demanding a bowl of M&Ms with all the brown ones removed. It's a simple test that shows that the venue paid attention to the whole contract.
On one hand, I’ve never seen RWBY but judging by the post, something negative went down between two characters and from a certain view point, it would seem like the shirt is glamorizing/endorsing the negativity to the uninitiated.
Late and not gay because of Ddos attacks but your welcome. The fucking glasses were bugging the shit out me like a mosquito on a hot humid night in Texas.
Adam and Blake were in love at one point. They had a minor falling out, you know trying to kill each other nothing big. But people ship Blake with Yang anyways so anything even implying that there was love between Blake and Adam implies they endorse abuse
A little bit of both I'd say. Without going too much into the show proper, the long and short is that a shirt was made which had the word "lovers' quarrel" on it. People said that it was promoting an abusive relationship, while others have said that the "abusive relationship" was a mixture of bad writing and poorly handling the guy on the shirt. The store removed it, and those same people who complain about bad writing are saying they're pandering to the shippers of a ship between the girl on the shirt and another of the main characters.
Hi everyone! Just going to put my $.02 in here and brace for the BTFO...
Fair enough. I will say that there's a chance an argument could be made that their shit that they got themselves into would still happen even if they didn't fire Vic.
Thing is you are not wrong about making him more public, BUT this is all post lawsuit. If they had done this before the lawsuit, then it would work.Hi everyone! Just going to put my $.02 in here and brace for the BTFO...
There are a couple of rational reasons they would do this. Consider the optics here on just one of those reasons...
The biggest takeaway from the article was that the #metoo card got played (even if it wasn't theirs to play IMO) by the journalist on their behalf. If this journalist gets other #metoo journalists to write about it, it gets legs and spreads to other lamestream media (ANN/io9 types don't count). Thus, it gets to a wider audience. Wider audience means name recognition. Name recognition means the possibilities of him becoming a public figure (limited or otherwise) go up considerably.
Will it matter for this lolsuit? Nope. They've already lost this battle, and the legal eagles here have said it can't change that determination. If by sheer magic it does, then get those hats out boys and girls, and salt them up for the inevitable feasting on...
Will it matter for the possible future litigations (round 2, round 3, etc.)? I would tend to think so, but I could be wrong. Even better, I truly hope I'm wrong, because it could setup a nasty precedent going forward...
IANAL, but I welcome their response, and remember everyone: play nice!
Wait, I thought that the “the relationship was abusive” was only from a tweet by Blake’s VA.
Hi everyone! Just going to put my $.02 in here and brace for the BTFO...
There are a couple of rational reasons they would do this. Consider the optics here on just one of those reasons...
The biggest takeaway from the article was that the #metoo card got played (even if it wasn't theirs to play IMO) by the journalist on their behalf. If this journalist gets other #metoo journalists to write about it, it gets legs and spreads to other lamestream media (ANN/io9 types don't count). Thus, it gets to a wider audience. Wider audience means name recognition. Name recognition means the possibilities of him becoming a public figure (limited or otherwise) go up considerably.
Will it matter for this lolsuit? Nope. They've already lost this battle, and the legal eagles here have said it can't change that determination. If by sheer magic it does, then get those hats out boys and girls, and salt them up for the inevitable feasting on...
Will it matter for the possible future litigations (round 2, round 3, etc.)? I would tend to think so, but I could be wrong. Even better, I truly hope I'm wrong, because it could setup a nasty precedent going forward...
IANAL, but I welcome their response, and remember everyone: play nice!
Also, there's a good chance that if you follow RWBY, you may end up hating Arryn Zech and Barbara Dunkleman (Blake and Yang's VAs)
So, pretty damning stuff for Rial/Toye/Marchi's defense here.
Considering Denbow's investigation only investigated claims that Rial made, or Rial brought forward on behalf of others, and the social media firestorm they reference later in the affidavits all include statements made by Rial and Marchi.
Not to mention, Funi admits to breaking their own contract obligations by terminating him via telephone, and not in writing as stated in the contract.
Lots of shell games being played, and Law Twits/KVs are celebrating this filing
View attachment 878518
