Jump to content


My thoughts on the Foch incident.......


  • Please log in to reply
112 replies to this topic

Nightshield_ #101 Posted May 21 2017 - 02:17

    Staff sergeant

  • -Players-
  • 30244 battles
  • 325
  • Member since:
    06-07-2014
never mind.

Edited by Nightshield_, May 21 2017 - 02:21.


mrmojo #102 Posted May 21 2017 - 02:23

    Captain

  • Players
  • 17165 battles
  • 1,618
  • [-LEG-] -LEG-
  • Member since:
    07-24-2011

View PostBurglarOfBanff_ff, on May 20 2017 - 20:44, said:

WG is obviously not without it's problems, but I watched the original Foch video and as part of his attack on WG he used the names of WG employees and their children.  That's over the line. 

 

Go find the foch f-you video and have another look - you are absolutely, 100% wrong.

 

Then go find the circon highway video or his apology video and you might see how you have become confused.

 

 

 

 



Burnsider #103 Posted May 21 2017 - 03:34

    Corporal

  • -Players-
  • 1471 battles
  • 17
  • [DHO] DHO
  • Member since:
    07-13-2015

View PostMainerd, on May 21 2017 - 01:34, said:

 

Then Foch should take them to court and sue for damages. Maybe he can be awarded $1 just like the USFL.

 

Are you just being deliberately obtuse? Your point, meant sarcastically, is actually the whole crux of my argument. If Foch is forced to go to court, even if he wins (which he will), he loses. That's why it's a BS move by WG. 


Edited by Burnsider, May 21 2017 - 03:35.


BeanHoleBandit #104 Posted May 21 2017 - 04:24

    Staff sergeant

  • -Players-
  • 10927 battles
  • 464
  • Member since:
    12-21-2014
WG gave him permission to try the tanks out..

He didn't like it made a comment WG did not like so they attacked him.. 

I see some of you say this and that.. I'm glad he did it, I didn't like him..  They used him to get what they wanted good reviews as soon as he made a bad one and went on a rampage for what he knew.. They not ONLY canned him they went after another channel that did not belong to WG..

I'm sorry i've dealt with alot of companies i'm not 12 living off my parents.. A good company makes it complete.. Not drive a wedge in it.. 

But they got alot of well guys that guy i dont like him.. Its whatever.. When it happens to you.. You will know.. And i don't wanna hear you [edited].. Like most of you do anyway.. 

BeanHoleBandit #105 Posted May 21 2017 - 04:35

    Staff sergeant

  • -Players-
  • 10927 battles
  • 464
  • Member since:
    12-21-2014
OK.. Explain to me this.. Why do you think it was legit for them to threatin.. HIS OWN PERSONAL CHANNEL OF HIS FEELINGS.. 

Cause it had their game in it?   Well they gave him permission.. I promise you, he had it.. Or why else would he be doing it...

They got butthurt then threatened to sabotage his PERSONAL CHANNEL for THEIR cause.  They didn't care about him... They never did. All they wanted is a dic sucker to suck dic.. When he quit they got butthurt. 

Now let me explain this.. I was unhappy with FedEx.. I cursed them cursed them, talked to them like dawgs.. Did they threaten to come after my bank account? Or my Facebook? NOOOOOO.. You know what they did do?    Try to fix the problem..   

BeanHoleBandit #106 Posted May 21 2017 - 04:43

    Staff sergeant

  • -Players-
  • 10927 battles
  • 464
  • Member since:
    12-21-2014
its funny watching these forums complain about the way they are treated or the way they think the game should go.. Then when a unicum or a guy in position to make a change.. DOES.. You cant wait to throw him under the bus... 

Why? What do you think your going to get out of it? A dic sucking badge?   His job.. I promise none of you that are agreeing with WG.. They don't even like you or know who you are.. And if they had a chance they did it to him.. Do you not think they would do it to you?

well i'd never do that if they let me get free tanks i'd suck all the D they had.. I'd suck meat heads and Phlabs and any other hot dog  they threw in my face to get a new tank..  GET A JOB get out your MOMS house.. I mean come on really.

I've never had a company come at me personally.. I'd imagine that day would be a bad day for everyone. 

Pipinghot #107 Posted May 21 2017 - 04:53

    Major

  • Players
  • 25799 battles
  • 6,759
  • [IOC] IOC
  • Member since:
    11-20-2011

View PostMainerd, on May 20 2017 - 13:54, said:

View PostPipinghot, on May 20 2017 - 09:31, said:

And it boggles more reasonable and knowledgeable minds that you don't understand that threatening copyright infringement over a negative review has long been established as an abusive strong-arm tactic and is almost universally frowned on by courts. The very idea of filing a copyright infringement lawsuit against a critic is considered a frivolous lawsuit by its very nature.

So I guess WG has no rights and just needs to let him profit off their material while he screams F.U. at them since you have already tried the case. I think this is more of a case of Foch being unreasonable. Let's see nearly the same issue with Circon but handled quickly and even reinstating him as a CC. Clearly WG is an unreasonable evil corporate entity (sarcasm off).

They do have rights obviously, but their rights end at removing his CC status and refusing to invite him to anything they sponsor, as these are things which they bestow at their pleasure and remove at their pleasure. They have no rights to issue a copyright strike, or to even threaten to issue a copyright strike, no matter what language a reviewer uses. Yes, Foch was unreasonable in how he delivered his message, but that does not justify threatening a copyright strike. The world (and especially the internet) is full of examples of reviewers who are extremely over the top and objectionable, and yet it is well established they are not in violation of copyright.



Metal_Church #108 Posted May 21 2017 - 10:55

    Captain

  • Players
  • 56469 battles
  • 1,366
  • [NEAD] NEAD
  • Member since:
    10-29-2011
no sweat off my balls.

cazando #109 Posted May 21 2017 - 15:58

    Sergeant

  • Players
  • 23401 battles
  • 246
  • Member since:
    01-22-2012

All that matters really is was what he said true????

 

If it was true and not lies then WG is totally at fault.  They can do what they want to remove him from their game/employment/association with WG, but cannot do anything personal against him.

 

Just because a person who sees the same thing as everyone else that speaks up is not the villain.

 

We all know WG's strategy for making money and it works. Being the little child and crying when someone states the truth is exactly what I would expect from them

 

That's why they will never get another dime of mine again!



noupperlobeman #110 Posted May 21 2017 - 16:23

    Major

  • Players
  • 18104 battles
  • 4,511
  • [KOOL] KOOL
  • Member since:
    08-07-2012

View PostNightshield_, on May 19 2017 - 23:02, said:

The real issue is

 

Why did two very respected Community Contributors and Youtubes go off about the game at the same time.

 

 

Foch isn't respected. He is a dancing monkey with a hacky schtick that people line up to point and laugh at.

 

Circon is only slightly better



noupperlobeman #111 Posted May 21 2017 - 16:25

    Major

  • Players
  • 18104 battles
  • 4,511
  • [KOOL] KOOL
  • Member since:
    08-07-2012

View Postmrmojo, on May 19 2017 - 23:34, said:

 

Should be in the dictionary under ironic - as in:

 

ironic; eg: noupperlobman says " No one cares about all these nobodies voicing their not so unique opinions"

 

I long for the days when a real comeback wasn't just repeating the same thing back to someone. Good times, those

Mainerd #112 Posted May 21 2017 - 21:17

    Sergeant

  • -Players-
  • 16026 battles
  • 239
  • [DRB] DRB
  • Member since:
    09-04-2014

View PostBurnsider, on May 20 2017 - 20:34, said:

 

Are you just being deliberately obtuse? Your point, meant sarcastically, is actually the whole crux of my argument. If Foch is forced to go to court, even if he wins (which he will), he loses. That's why it's a BS move by WG. 

 

Then maybe if he relies on Wargaming to provide him with material to earn a living he should show them some respect. Ask yourself would you provide a living to someone who spoke to you the way Foch did to Wargaming? Foch still relies on Wargaming material in his videos to make a living. Maybe people like Foch will cause copyright laws to be tightened up that copyrighted material can only be used be licensed journalist working for the press. Wouldn't that be a great end result where the people that have the money rewrite the laws. Of-course that would never happen would it.

Burnsider #113 Posted Yesterday, 04:16 AM

    Corporal

  • -Players-
  • 1471 battles
  • 17
  • [DHO] DHO
  • Member since:
    07-13-2015

View PostMainerd, on May 21 2017 - 21:17, said:

 

Then maybe if he relies on Wargaming to provide him with material to earn a living he should show them some respect. Ask yourself would you provide a living to someone who spoke to you the way Foch did to Wargaming? Foch still relies on Wargaming material in his videos to make a living. Maybe people like Foch will cause copyright laws to be tightened up that copyrighted material can only be used be licensed journalist working for the press. Wouldn't that be a great end result where the people that have the money rewrite the laws. Of-course that would never happen would it.

And I'm done. 






2 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 2 guests, 0 anonymous users