I’m not saying I necessarily agree with it, but I believe the intention is basically as a deterrent. If you cause $5000 worth of “damages” to someone and they have to sue and win, and the most that can happen is $5000 of repayment, you’ve basically created an incentive to try to get away with stuff - the worst case scenario would be paying what you owed anyway. If you might have to pay $175k for making 5k, it might make you think twice about taking that chance.
Now the real conversation is actually about whether those kinds of negative incentives are actually related to the decision to commit a crime. I don’t have any solid evidence but my gut tells me no - people who are going to commit a crime usually assume they are going to get away with it, don’t factor potential outcomes into their risk assessment, or don’t have any risk assessment at all.
The loser of a lawsuit always has to cover the cost of the lawsuit, including the other party’s lawyer fees (except in cases where the state attorney sues and a bunch of other exceptions like when an employee starts a labor dispute). They are very much capped based on the disputed sum though. The higher the dispute, the higher the attorney fees you have to pay when losing.
For example, if the disputed sum is 5000€ the base lawyer fees are ~390€. It can then be multiplied by some factor - I think 2.5 is the maximum but I’m unsure - depending on the length and difficulty of the case.
They aren’t a punishment but rather a consequence of losing a lawsuit.
They are also usually covered by your legal protection insurance which is generally recommended to have.
Oh. that’s crazy. But honestly good. It’s really easy to not cheat, and when i saw what some people pay to cheat MONTHLY, it’s even harder to find sympathy.
It would be nice to find an anti cheat that actually works, but i often think that people who make the game are the same people who double dip into selling their own cheats.
You are not logged in. However you can subscribe from another Fediverse account, for example Lemmy or Mastodon. To do this, paste the following into the search field of your instance: [email protected]
Video game news oriented community. No NanoUFO is not a bot :)
Posts.
News oriented content (general reviews, previews or retrospectives allowed).
Broad discussion posts (preferably not only about a specific game).
No humor/memes etc…
No affiliate links
No advertising.
No clickbait, editorialized, sensational titles. State the game in question in the title. No all caps.
No self promotion.
No duplicate posts, newer post will be deleted unless there is more discussion in one of the posts.
No politics.
Comments.
No personal attacks.
Obey instance rules.
No low effort comments(one or two words, emoji etc…)
Please use spoiler tags for spoilers.
My goal is just to have a community where people can go and see what new game news is out for the day and comment on it.
US awarded “damages” are utterly insane.
How do the judges even come up with those numbers? By rolling a die?
I’m really happy to live in a country where the awarded damages must only cover the damage amount and the damaged party mustn’t profit from them.
I’m not saying I necessarily agree with it, but I believe the intention is basically as a deterrent. If you cause $5000 worth of “damages” to someone and they have to sue and win, and the most that can happen is $5000 of repayment, you’ve basically created an incentive to try to get away with stuff - the worst case scenario would be paying what you owed anyway. If you might have to pay $175k for making 5k, it might make you think twice about taking that chance.
Now the real conversation is actually about whether those kinds of negative incentives are actually related to the decision to commit a crime. I don’t have any solid evidence but my gut tells me no - people who are going to commit a crime usually assume they are going to get away with it, don’t factor potential outcomes into their risk assessment, or don’t have any risk assessment at all.
The loser of a lawsuit always has to cover the cost of the lawsuit, including the other party’s lawyer fees (except in cases where the state attorney sues and a bunch of other exceptions like when an employee starts a labor dispute). They are very much capped based on the disputed sum though. The higher the dispute, the higher the attorney fees you have to pay when losing.
For example, if the disputed sum is 5000€ the base lawyer fees are ~390€. It can then be multiplied by some factor - I think 2.5 is the maximum but I’m unsure - depending on the length and difficulty of the case.
They aren’t a punishment but rather a consequence of losing a lawsuit.
They are also usually covered by your legal protection insurance which is generally recommended to have.
isn’t that like what fortnite makes a second?
and probably more than what the cheat maker makes in a year
They sued a player not the cheat maker
Oh. that’s crazy. But honestly good. It’s really easy to not cheat, and when i saw what some people pay to cheat MONTHLY, it’s even harder to find sympathy. It would be nice to find an anti cheat that actually works, but i often think that people who make the game are the same people who double dip into selling their own cheats.
It was someone that cheated in a tournament. Not a player in random match online. Although he probably tested the cheats there first.
The article is like 10 sentences I don’t get why people don’t want to read it.
Very few people even bother to clock the link. They only ever read the headline.
What a weird website to be on if they don’t like clicking links