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

[Stoneheart]

UL argued in earlier videos that while Vic is a limited purpose public figure thanks to his "brand recognition" (my words not his) since he's de facto one of the most - if not the most famous English dub voice actor, he also states that Vic is not libel proof.

Vic just did pulp anime...

 

[feral cat #6385]

If that happened, could Nick still make videos about it? Or would he just have to be careful?

Probably not. There would probably have to be another Lawsplainer to do it.

 

[Sheryl Nome]

Probably not. There would probably have to be another Lawsplainer to do it.

Why wouldn't Nick make vids about himself being sued by Ron Toye, what could he possibly have to lose by making vids

There's no fucking gag order that stops you from talking about a lawsuit you're in 99.9% of the time, its often a bad idea, but obviously its not always a bad idea.

 

[DuckzillA]

I've recently been listening to Uncivil Law lately who, from what I can tell, tries to be as down to earth and impartial as possible taking a look at the various court docs regarding this case. In earlier videos he estimates MoRon's chance at winning to be at ~75%, Funimation's at ~85% and Vic's at around 30-40%. Especially in earlier videos he did get some minor facts wrong, but he said that the amount of background research he did on the case is probably more than the court of appeals will likely do.

UL argued in earlier videos that while Vic is a limited purpose public figure thanks to his "brand recognition" (my words not his) since he's de facto one of the most - if not the most famous English dub voice actor, he also states that Vic is not libel proof.

Here's the latest one:
https://youtube.com/watch?v=Mn80MUyp_qA
I can't say how right or wrong he is, but let's just say that my ignorance on American law is the only reason I'm giving Ty and Nick the benefit of the doubt; because other than that I stand by calling Ty the Sargon of Weeb Wars.

That amount of times that he just glossed over the citations annoyed TF out of me.

 

[Leibowitz]

Judging by tonight's Greerstream by Rekieta, Ty ought to hire Russell to clean up the firm's legal documents. He appears to be a more competent othographer than whoever currently mauls BHBC's submissions to the court. And you don't even have to worry about drool stains in a digital format.

 

[LawTwitter is Dumb]

Why wouldn't Nick make vids about himself being sued by Ron Toye, what could he possibly have to lose by making vids

There's no fucking gag order that stops you from talking about a lawsuit you're in 99.9% of the time, its often a bad idea, but obviously its not always a bad idea.

In this case if it ever happens, would be really funny as Ron would never have a case against Nick in any actual fashion.

 

[Least Concern]

That's no stretch. Also libel proof and public figure are two completely different things. Almost nobody is libel proof. You practically have to be a convicted serial killer or a child molester to have a reputation so bad you can't be defamed further.

Let's say that I'm a serial killer and a child molester, but I've never fucked a dog and there's no evidence that I ever fucked a dog. But some asshole on the Internet keeps tweeting about how I'm a dogfucker and he has accounts from over 100 dogs that I've fucked and they will release the evidence about that when the time is right. Now despite the terrible things I have done, I have no recourse against the person accusing me of doing a terrible thing I didn't do?

If that's really true, I think I have a problem with that.

EDIT: And let's say I could prove damages against me due to this person calling me a dogfucker specifically.

 

[PrinceofAllCucks]

Let's say that I'm a serial killer and a child molester, but I've never fucked a dog and there's no evidence that I ever fucked a dog. But some asshole on the Internet keeps tweeting about how I'm a dogfucker and he has accounts from over 100 dogs that I've fucked and they will release the evidence about that when the time is right. Now despite the terrible things I have done, I have no recourse against the person accusing me of doing a terrible thing I didn't do?

If that's really true, I think I have a problem with that.

Well, it would depend on if you were ever caught for the murders/molestation or if they were also just rumors, cause otherwise you'd be in prison and it pretty much wouldn't matter and wouldn't help your case.

 

[Least Concern]

Well, it would depend on if you were ever caught for the murders/molestation or if they were also just rumors, cause otherwise you'd be in prison and it pretty much wouldn't matter and wouldn't help your case.

I was assuming that, yes, I had been convicted of both, though I hadn't given any thought as to whether I was in prison. But does that matter? Are people in prison libel-proof somehow? I'd have a problem with that too.

 

[AnOminous]

Let's say that I'm a serial killer and a child molester, but I've never fucked a dog and there's no evidence that I ever fucked a dog. But some asshole on the Internet keeps tweeting about how I'm a dogfucker and he has accounts from over 100 dogs that I've fucked and they will release the evidence about that when the time is right. Now despite the terrible things I have done, I have no recourse against the person accusing me of doing a terrible thing I didn't do?

Pretty much. It's no worse than what your reputation already is. Everyone thinks you should be taken out and shot anyway, what are they going to do, shoot you again after that? The court is not going to bother spending hundreds of thousands of taxpayer dollars for a huge trial about how many pennies your remaining reputation as a child molesting serial killer is worth.

 

[Super Smelly Vagina]

cause otherwise you'd be in prison

Not if you live in CHAZ/CHOP or Liberia

 

[FlappyBat]

Let's say that I'm a serial killer and a child molester, but I've never fucked a dog and there's no evidence that I ever fucked a dog. But some asshole on the Internet keeps tweeting about how I'm a dogfucker and he has accounts from over 100 dogs that I've fucked and they will release the evidence about that when the time is right. Now despite the terrible things I have done, I have no recourse against the person accusing me of doing a terrible thing I didn't do?

If that's really true, I think I have a problem with that.

EDIT: And let's say I could prove damages against me due to this person calling me a dogfucker specifically.

I think the point of libel proof is that your reputation is so bad you couldn't have any damages against you. If you can be damaged by your reputation getting worse then you aren't libel proof.

 

[Kosher Salt]

Let's say that I'm a serial killer and a child molester, but I've never fucked a dog and there's no evidence that I ever fucked a dog. But some asshole on the Internet keeps tweeting about how I'm a dogfucker and he has accounts from over 100 dogs that I've fucked and they will release the evidence about that when the time is right. Now despite the terrible things I have done, I have no recourse against the person accusing me of doing a terrible thing I didn't do?

If that's really true, I think I have a problem with that.

EDIT: And let's say I could prove damages against me due to this person calling me a dogfucker specifically.

If you could prove damages due to that person calling you a dogfucker specifically, you'd still have to show that the defamatory accusation was substantially more harmful to your reputation than the truth alone would have been.

If you had somebody saying "okay, maybe he murdered hookers and touched children, but I was still considering hiring him to clean shit out of dog cages until I heard that he's also a dogfucker," then you may actually have a case. But how likely is that really?

 

[Stoneheart]

Pretty much. It's no worse than what your reputation already is. Everyone thinks you should be taken out and shot anyway, what are they going to do, shoot you again after that? The court is not going to bother spending hundreds of thousands of taxpayer dollars for a huge trial about how many pennies your remaining reputation as a child molesting serial killer is worth.

but if you have a dog walking business and lose your income from this rumors?

 

[AnOminous]

I think the point of libel proof is that your reputation is so bad you couldn't have any damages against you. If you can be damaged by your reputation getting worse then you aren't libel proof.

I can't think offhand of any case where someone was found categorically to be libel-proof for all future cases as well as the current one, so if there are such cases, they are few and far between. However, while it might be on a case by case basis, I doubt, for instance, that there are any circumstances where Jeffrey Dahmer could have won a libel suit.

 

[teriyakiburns]

I can't think offhand of any case where someone was found categorically to be libel-proof for all future cases as well as the current one, so if there are such cases, they are few and far between. However, while it might be on a case by case basis, I doubt, for instance, that there are any circumstances where Jeffrey Dahmer could have won a libel suit.

He might if someone accused him of being Ron Toye.

 

[Mr. 0]

He might if someone accused him of being Ron Toye.

you're Ron Toye

 

[Bender]

you're Ron Toye

I've seen a lot of shit here on the Kiwi Farms, but I've never seen a user make such a disgusting accusation. What in the fuck is wrong with you, @Trombonista? I thought you were cool.

 

[RodgerDodger]

I can't think offhand of any case where someone was found categorically to be libel-proof for all future cases as well as the current one, so if there are such cases, they are few and far between. However, while it might be on a case by case basis, I doubt, for instance, that there are any circumstances where Jeffrey Dahmer could have won a libel suit.

Maybe if someone called him a lousy cook, thus preventing him from being hired at the local Waffle House?

 

[ConSluttant]

I know old boomers who still do everything with printouts and pen and have one person in charge of merging any changes into the document. They'd never hand in shit like this and would be mortified if they did. I think that's a little archaic for my tastes (and with competent version control you can do the same things), but it certainly results in quality work.

I would submit that Ty's firm needs to go back to the old days. There was a reason why even after we switched to all digital we printed stuff out on paper and did our mockups before we sent the paper to bed for the day. Printing out hundreds of pages of a technical manual is wasteful of paper sure, but you pick up so much stuff when you leaf through it that you ignore when it's on the computer screen and you've been staring at it for weeks. Paper and that blue marking pen ftw.