Victor Mignogna v. Funimation Productions, LLC, et al. (2019) - Vic's lawsuit against Funimation, VAs, and others, for over a million dollars.

  • ATTENTION: The National Security Administration has made a press release regarding a Windows 10 remote execution exploit that any website can take advantage of. It is one of the worst exploits that has ever been found. Update Windows immediately.

    NSA Press Release, "Am I vulnerable?"

I can't imagine

kiwifarms.net
Hey, law side of KF. What kind of liability do convention runners open themselves up to by allowing these panels where people are openly defaming Vic? Surely there is some sort of vicarious liability? I mean, surely all it takes is ONE person with a hidden recorder to procure enough evidence that this happened AT their event and that they did not do ANYTHING to discourage it.
I'm pretty sure part of the panel agreement includes a clause holding the panelists responsible for all content within their panel. I'm not a lawyer, tho, so I couldn't tell you how that actually would work in the context of a lawsuit.
 

Sheryl Nome

Listen to my song
kiwifarms.net
I'm pretty sure part of the panel agreement includes a clause holding the panelists responsible for all content within their panel. I'm not a lawyer, tho, so I couldn't tell you how that actually would work in the context of a lawsuit.
They're independent contractors, there's no liability for the convention unless they're making comments on behalf of the convention in some way when they're saying that.
 
  • Thunk-Provoking
Reactions: 774 and Terrifik

Bender

I bend stuff, usually the truth.
kiwifarms.net
They're independent contractors, there's no liability for the convention unless they're making comments on behalf of the convention in some way when they're saying that.
There's also no evidence anything defamatory was said during the "roast" until video/audio of said "roast" gets released or leaked, so I guess the participants are safe on that count, too?
 
  • Optimistic
Reactions: Terrifik

AnOminous

Really?
True & Honest Fan
Retired Staff
kiwifarms.net
I'm gonna say outright no on the vicarious liability, they're not employees of the cons, they're not the agents of the cons, they're clearly independent contractors, as such I don't see how the cons could be held vicariously liable for the statements of attendees in any way.
They're liable for what they allow. There's nothing like a § 230 protecting convention operators. They're as vicariously liable as they would be for commercial trademark infringement, selling stolen merchandise, or other tortious actions committed on their premises with their permission which harm third parties.

I'm pretty sure part of the panel agreement includes a clause holding the panelists responsible for all content within their panel. I'm not a lawyer, tho, so I couldn't tell you how that actually would work in the context of a lawsuit.
That doesn't make them not liable, it just means the panelists or other participants who commit illegal acts have to indemnify the convention operators for any liabilities they incur, such as lost lawsuits, due to their actions.

They're independent contractors, there's no liability for the convention unless they're making comments on behalf of the convention in some way when they're saying that.
That isn't how that works, though. They are allowing a panel that is basically "let's defame this guy." They can't claim they don't know what that's about any more than having a "let's sell each other things we stole from local stores" panel.

This isn't a situation where you have Mark Waid show up and he just happens to defame Richard Meyer while he's there. It's a panel expressly devoted to defaming one specific named person who isn't there.
 

I can't imagine

kiwifarms.net
That doesn't make them not liable, it just means the panelists or other participants who commit illegal acts have to indemnify the convention operators for any liabilities they incur, such as lost lawsuits, due to their actions.
So, if I understand your meaning: the con could be sued and lose, but the panelists would be held contractually liable for any losses incurred. Is that correct?
 

Sheryl Nome

Listen to my song
kiwifarms.net
That isn't how that works, though. They are allowing a panel that is basically "let's defame this guy." They can't claim they don't know what that's about any more than having a "let's sell each other things we stole from local stores" panel.

This isn't a situation where you have Mark Waid show up and he just happens to defame Richard Meyer while he's there. It's a panel expressly devoted to defaming one specific named person who isn't there.
If its the 'Lets literally defame vic' Panel then yeah I think you could probably do something to the convention. Maybe.

I just find it unlikely that a con would actually do that, a 'roast' panel making fun of someone who isn't even there is weird, but for sure defamatory? Ehhh.
 

Bender

I bend stuff, usually the truth.
kiwifarms.net
They're liable for what they allow. There's nothing like a § 230 protecting convention operators. They're as vicariously liable as they would be for commercial trademark infringement, selling stolen merchandise, or other tortious actions committed on their premises with their permission which harm third parties.
So what you're saying is if clips of this "roasting of Vic Mignogna" were released and it was obviously at this convention, I would be justified in having a premature justice boner?
 

AnOminous

Really?
True & Honest Fan
Retired Staff
kiwifarms.net
If its the 'Lets literally defame vic' Panel then yeah I think you could probably do something to the convention. Maybe.

I just find it unlikely that a con would actually do that, a 'roast' panel making fun of someone who isn't even there is weird, but for sure defamatory? Ehhh.
They have some obligation to know what's going on at their convention. They can't just allow rampant trademark infringement or intellectual property violations. They can't allow the sale of illegal goods, whether they're outright illegal like drugs or child pornography, or things like goods sold in violation of licenses.

It's on a reasonableness standard for most things, so they're not obligated to have godlike omniscience or be on the hook for things they couldn't have known were happening, but there's no way a "roast" panel, or whatever the fuck you want to call it, of Vic Mignogna under the current circumstances is remotely in good faith. They can't just let everyone run hog wild and then pretend they had no idea what was going on.

I'd say they'd get away with it largely because dragging in new people as defendants while the case is out on appeal already after having been lost would be pretty reckless, but if it comes back, anyone involved with this bullshit should expect to get dragged in at least as witnesses if they ever get to a damages stage, because reckless, wildly illegal behavior like this is directly connected to the original actions and encouragement of the defendants, and wouldn't have happened had they not started this hate campaign.

So they may be defendants themselves, but even if they're not, they're literally part of the damages in the existing case. This is the kind of shit Ron Toye, Monica Rial, Jamie Marchi and Funimation deliberately set into motion specifically to cause exactly this kind of harm.
 

Dumb Bitch Smoothie

Any time now, faggots.
kiwifarms.net
I'm definitely no expert but I'd assume it would work more in the sense of the convention being subpoenaed for evidence but not necessarily held responsible for the evidence itself?

Kind of like getting Twitter logs or the whole Dropbox shit. But again, I'm no expert. I could be talking out of my ass for all I know.

But when it comes to 18+ panels....recordings exist. AWL is a cocky enough bitch to have saved it or have had someone save it because she gets off to what she perceives as her own witty comebacks and banter. If she doesn't directly have it, someone else does.

Maybe her husband.
 

Elric of Melnibone

kiwifarms.net
My main question in all this is if someone recorded this event and provided it to someone, what would be the legal ramifications for them? I mean assuming they provided it to a "journalist" then there are shield laws to protect them, but assuming the worst happens and the shield laws failed would they be open to civil or criminal repercussions?
 

Laundui_or_douchette?

kiwifarms.net
My main question in all this is if someone recorded this event and provided it to someone, what would be the legal ramifications for them? I mean assuming they provided it to a "journalist" then there are shield laws to protect them, but assuming the worst happens and the shield laws failed would they be open to civil or criminal repercussions?
likely just banned from the con for life. There wouldn’t be any civil or criminal, as it isn’t as if they are signing an NDA.

plus anyone withhalf a brain would just create a burner account and upload it all.
 

AnOminous

Really?
True & Honest Fan
Retired Staff
kiwifarms.net
My main question in all this is if someone recorded this event and provided it to someone, what would be the legal ramifications for them? I mean assuming they provided it to a "journalist" then there are shield laws to protect them, but assuming the worst happens and the shield laws failed would they be open to civil or criminal repercussions?
Depends. Do tickets have any of that shit on the back of them where you agree not to record stuff if you attend? Is there any obligation not to record any of it? Are there rules? Are those rules actually binding? Anyone in that situation should probably talk to their own legal counsel before doing anything, if they're concerned about that kind of thing.
 

L50LasPak

Life on the outside ain't what it used to be.
kiwifarms.net
Its worth noting that they probably can't get away with twisting the word "Roast" either since every fucking Roast dating back to Dean Martin and probably even further back to the Friar's Club you A. Must have the person as a guest of honor at the event and B. Its not literally an event where you just make fun of somebody endlessly, its supposed to be good-natured in addition to insulting. There's no law stating that's what a Roast has to be of course but I bet you could prove, in court, that this is not a "roast" and instead just more defamation.
 
Last edited:

HTTP Error 404

kiwifarms.net
Its worth noting that they probably can't get away with twisting the word "Roast" either since every fucking Roast dating back to Dean Martin and probably even further back to the Friar's Club you A. Must have the person as a guest of honor at the event and B. Its not literally an event where you just make fun of somebody endlessly, its supposed to be good-natured in addition to insulting. There's no law stating that's what a Roast has to be of course but I bet you could prove, in court, that this is not a "roast" and instead just more defamation.
"Oh, but this was just a fun event that we all did our "jokes" knowing it wasn't true. That's why I called him a pedophile -- Defamation per se -- when I bragged to the pleb anime fans that were questioning me about it later, in public. Because acting like a sanctimonious cunt is our idea of FUN." - Le Horsefaced Washed Up VA Lady
 

AnOminous

Really?
True & Honest Fan
Retired Staff
kiwifarms.net
Its worth noting that they probably can't get away with twisting the word "Roast" either since every fucking Roast dating back to Dean Martin and probably even further back to the Friar's Club you A. Must have the person as a guest of honor at the event and B. Its not literally an event where you just make fun of somebody endlessly, its supposed to be good-natured in addition to insulting. There's no law stating that's what a Roast has to be of course but I bet you could prove, in court, that this is not a "roast" and instead just more defamation.
Roasts are generally of friends of the people who are roasting them. There are some exceptions, for instance, the New York Friars' Club roast of Chevy Chase was outright fucking sadistic and brutal, and many of the people there were taking revenge for years of shit from Chevy Chase. That was a fairly rare occasion and not many people are as gigantic an asshole as Chevy Chase such that everyone at their roast hates them. Even worse, none of his actual "friends" showed up so a lot of the people were people who didn't even know him but still hated him.
 

Terrifik

kiwifarms.net
My main question in all this is if someone recorded this event and provided it to someone, what would be the legal ramifications for them? I mean assuming they provided it to a "journalist" then there are shield laws to protect them, but assuming the worst happens and the shield laws failed would they be open to civil or criminal repercussions?
Is this not the same issue with mark vs yaboy zack case with waids's comments on zack & zack comments on dark roast- private stream. Which reach the point of people having to confiscate phones so people don't get in trouble for their own fredom of speech. Or lead people baning the person who leaked the information.
 

774

私は誰?
kiwifarms.net
Fuck. I can't remember what it was called but you buy the misspelled domain of a popular website.
Typosquatting.

So Funkimation or Funiation.
The second one could definitely work. Not so sure about the first.

If any Kiwis want to actually do this, let's hope we're not giving the KV people ideas to steal. 😆

likely just banned from the con for life.
Well, that's assuming they can figure out who did the recording. Or do you mean the journalist who reports on it? Not necessarily the same person.
 
  • Optimistic
Reactions: Terrifik

OneHandClapping

dear god no
kiwifarms.net
Exactly this.

"You gave the recording of the roast to Nick and Ty and now they're saying I need to retain a lawyer too!"

"Prove it."
If you're anonymous, good luck trying to find you.

Good luck getting Nick to reveal his sources, because of journalistic shield laws.

As long as Nick himself obtains the leak legally (e.g. he didn't blackmail the leaker) there's not much they can do.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Ken Jennings
Tags
None

About Us

The Kiwi Farms is about eccentric individuals and communities on the Internet. We call them lolcows because they can be milked for amusement or laughs. Our community is bizarrely diverse and spectators are encouraged to join the discussion.

We do not place intrusive ads, host malware, sell data, or run crypto miners with your browser. If you experience these things, you have a virus. If your malware system says otherwise, it is faulty.

Supporting the Forum

How to Help

The Kiwi Farms is constantly attacked by insane people and very expensive to run. It would not be here without community support.

BTC: 1DgS5RfHw7xA82Yxa5BtgZL65ngwSk6bmm
ETH: 0xc1071c60Ae27C8CC3c834E11289205f8F9C78CA5
BAT: 0xc1071c60Ae27C8CC3c834E11289205f8F9C78CA5
LTC: LSZsFCLUreXAZ9oyc9JRUiRwbhkLCsFi4q
XMR: 438fUMciiahbYemDyww6afT1atgqK3tSTX25SEmYknpmenTR6wvXDMeco1ThX2E8gBQgm9eKd1KAtEQvKzNMFrmjJJpiino