Post Verdict Dispute Discussion: Jeremy Young - Arcade - Donkey Kong - Points [Hammer Allowed] - Player: Billy L Mitchell - Score: 1,062,800

  1. 06-29-2020, 10:01 PM
    Earlier today, Billy Mitchell filed a "Motion to Strike Reply Evidence."

    This motion seeks to prevent the court from considering all the evidence that Twin Galaxies provided in its recent Reply that informs the Court of facts missing from Billy's Opposition papers...

    -OR-

    It alternatively asks the court to grant more time for Billy to respond to what Billy calls "new evidence" that has been presented.

    In response, the Twin Galaxies legal team filed an "Opposition to Motion to Strike" - which explains to the court that the evidence of Twin Galaxies on reply is not "new evidence" but is instead reply evidence that informs the Court of facts missing from Billy's Opposition papers.

    Presentation of these facts is necessary to ensure Twin Galaxies is afforded due process in the pursuit of vindicating the First Amendment right to free speech.

    You can find both Billy's and Twin Galaxies' motion documents here for download as they are in the public record now.

    https://drive.google.com/drive/folde...vxv2hhieRzt-m1

    The Community can rest assured that Twin Galaxies will continue to fight for truth every step of the way without hesitation. TG has nothing to hide and will continue to maintain full transparency in this matter.

    In the meanwhile, Billy Mitchell (or anyone else) is always invited to provide Twin Galaxies with any technical information that can definitively show how an unmodified original Donkey Kong Arcade PCB and TWO BIT converter can produce a direct feed signal to a VCR that when recorded and played back displays all of the image characteristics and rasterization properties found in the 1,047,200 and 1,050,200 score performance recordings that Jeremy Young's dispute claim discussed - and which Twin Galaxies has previously issued its opinion and decision on.
  2. 06-29-2020, 10:07 PM
    Quote Originally Posted by TWIN GALAXIES View Post
    Earlier today, Billy Mitchell filed a "Motion to Strike Reply Evidence."

    This motion seeks to prevent the court from considering all the evidence that Twin Galaxies provided in its recent Reply that informs the Court of facts missing from Billy's Opposition papers...

    -OR-

    It alternatively asks the court to grant more time for Billy to respond to what Billy calls "new evidence" that has been presented.

    In response, the Twin Galaxies legal team filed an "Opposition to Motion to Strike" - which explains to the court that the evidence of Twin Galaxies on reply is not "new evidence" but is instead reply evidence that informs the Court of facts missing from Billy's Opposition papers.

    Presentation of these facts is necessary to ensure Twin Galaxies is afforded due process in the pursuit of vindicating the First Amendment right to free speech.

    You can find both Billy's and Twin Galaxies' motion documents here for download as they are in the public record now.

    https://drive.google.com/drive/folde...vxv2hhieRzt-m1

    The Community can rest assured that Twin Galaxies will continue to fight for truth every step of the way without hesitation. TG has nothing to hide and will continue to maintain full transparency in this matter.

    In the meanwhile, Billy Mitchell (or anyone else) is always invited to provide Twin Galaxies with any technical information that can definitively show how an unmodified original Donkey Kong Arcade PCB and TWO BIT converter can produce a direct feed signal to a VCR that when recorded and played back displays all of the image characteristics and rasterization properties found in the 1,047,200 and 1,050,200 score performance recordings that Jeremy Young's dispute claim discussed - and which Twin Galaxies has previously issued its opinion and decision on.
    total off point nerd quesiton here

    While I'm super duper appreciative that TG is sharing everything, and i commend that, i thought that in legal matters you were supposed to keep things secret. So again, totally not complaining, very happy about the transparency, just wondering if sharing so much is wise in legal procedings. the nerd in me wants to understands law as it relates to this case better.
    If you have enjoyed this comment please consider clicking the "like" button
  3. 06-30-2020, 02:17 AM
    Quote Originally Posted by Snowflake View Post
    While I'm super duper appreciative that TG is sharing everything, and i commend that, i thought that in legal matters you were supposed to keep things secret. So again, totally not complaining, very happy about the transparency, just wondering if sharing so much is wise in legal procedings. the nerd in me wants to understands law as it relates to this case better.
    Generally, lawyers are just over-cautious. Why publish their filings when they don't have to? They don't want to tip their hands of what their defense strategy is going to be. All this stuff is technically publicly available anyway (just perhaps with a fee), so it's not like these are secrets getting out.

    The advantage here is that, by publishing these filings, a number of *ahem* interested parties are given an opportunity to dissect the claims for themselves. Twin Galaxies is absolutely in the right on this. Billy's defense is all smoke-and-mirrors, deception, misrepresentation, and flat out lies. The more that comes out about Team Billy and their defense statements just makes them look worse and worse.
    Thanks JJT_Defender thanked this post
    Likes sprinter461, JJT_Defender liked this post
  4. 06-30-2020, 02:42 AM
    On page 135 of Billy's declaration exhibits:

    Name:  Withdrawn - 1.png
Views: 231
Size:  6.9 KB

    Oooooh, now I'm curious.
  5. 06-30-2020, 04:28 AM
    Skipping a bunch of stuff for now. (Not skipping it in my review or my notes, I'm just not commenting on or addressing/debunking every little thing I could at this time.) But here's something funny I noticed, on page 192 of Billy's declaration exhibits from June 22:

    Name:  Apollo clip.png
Views: 200
Size:  592.8 KB

    "Exhibit 54" is only cited once in Billy's declaration, strictly in the context of him being shown in his restaurant in the movie. Except... that's not actually a screenshot of the actual movie. (Do they not have a copy of the movie? Like, anyone among them?) That's a screenshot from an Apollo Legend video. The words "King of Kong" in the corner are in the font Apollo uses to identify clip sources.
    Thanks JJT_Defender thanked this post
  6. 06-30-2020, 07:25 AM
    You gotta admit, the guy is determined to win at any cost.
    Lauren Tyler
    Eternal Champion of Ragol
    Likes sprinter461 liked this post
  7. 06-30-2020, 08:09 AM
    Quote Originally Posted by Lauren Tyler View Post
    You gotta admit, the guy is determined to win at any cost.
    He needs to watch Frozen... and "Let it go"... ;)
    Buy the Ticket... Take the Ride...


    Thanks Lauren Tyler thanked this post
    Likes Lauren Tyler, ersatz_cats liked this post
  8. 06-30-2020, 11:32 AM
    Quote Originally Posted by sprinter461 View Post
    He needs to watch Frozen... and "Let it go"... ;)
    We need an LOL reaction!
    Lauren Tyler
    Eternal Champion of Ragol
  9. 06-30-2020, 11:52 AM
    Quote Originally Posted by sprinter461 View Post
    He needs to watch Frozen... and "Let it go"... ;)

    I got another legal question.....

    If he does "let it go" at this point does that mean that he could be liable for any expenses that TG/Jace incurred defending themselves?



    john

    .
  10. 06-30-2020, 04:42 PM
    Quote Originally Posted by lexmark View Post
    If he does "let it go" at this point does that mean that he could be liable for any expenses that TG/Jace incurred defending themselves?

    Presuming the judge finds his case to be a Strategic Lawsuit Against Public Participation, then...

    Defendants prevailing on an anti-SLAPP motion (including any subsequent appeal) are entitled to a mandatory award of reasonable attorney's fees. After an anti-SLAPP motion has been filed, a plaintiff cannot escape this mandatory fee award by amending its complaint.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Strate...ion#California

    https://arstechnica.com/gaming/2020/...case-to-court/

    Otherwise, no.
    Last edited by grinder2112; 06-30-2020 at 05:16 PM.
    Thanks lexmark thanked this post
    Likes ersatz_cats, lexmark liked this post
Page 24 of 26 FirstFirst ... 14 22 23 24 25 26 LastLast
Results 231 to 240 of 259
Page 24 of 26 FirstFirst ... 14 22 23 24 25 26 LastLast
Join us