|
CIG is the company that has three mocap studios so they can expedite the process of animating people getting into and out of ships into which they do not fit. e; I have provided an image that summarizes this process 
|
#
?
Jan 20, 2018 19:51
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 19, 2024 01:35 |
|
|
I've been following lawyer French for a few months. As far as I can tell, he is practicing. I can't speak to his credentials, education, or how he appears out of his depth outside of strict IP law, but he's definitely represented recent cases.
|
|
#
?
Jan 20, 2018 19:54
|
|
|
I feel like the thread title should at least be What did the Chairman know, and when did he know it. I mean comon. XK posted:I've been following lawyer French for a few months. As far as I can tell, he is practicing. I can't speak to his credentials, education, or anything like that, but he's definitely represented recent cases. Dude seems ok. Don't really know why everyone is losing their poo poo over him. French please post here. Dusty Lens fucked around with this message at 19:57 on Jan 20, 2018 |
|
#
?
Jan 20, 2018 19:54
|
|
|
Dusty Lens posted:I feel like the thread title should at least be What did the Chairman know, and when did he know it. There's a reasonable argument that The Chairman doesn't know things.
|
|
#
?
Jan 20, 2018 19:56
|
|
|
|
|
#
?
Jan 20, 2018 20:02
|
|
|
Dusty Lens posted:I feel like the thread title should at least be What did the Chairman know, and when did he know it. What did the Warlord know would be more accurate, since it was a reflection of the "Did Derek call it and if so when and in what capacity" chat that was going on yestderday
|
|
#
?
Jan 20, 2018 20:05
|
|
|
Dusty Lens posted:Dude seems ok. Don't really know why everyone is losing their poo poo over him. The problem with French was well summarized in an earlier post: VictorianQueerLit posted:He is a backer. He shows the same faith based reasoning that the stereotypical "true believers" do except he is either dishonest or delusional enough to try and pretend he is some blind justice weighing the scales of this lawsuit while having an extremely clear bias. Basically, he's compromised, and as such is unable to provide impartial advice. When he claims he is doing so, invariably in CIG's favour, he's enabling more mentally ill to be scammed.
|
|
#
?
Jan 20, 2018 20:07
|
|
|
I'm not wrong, but if I am wrong, then I'm still not wrong because reality has failed me.
|
|
#
?
Jan 20, 2018 20:10
|
|
|
Sarsapariller posted:I'm not wrong, but if I am wrong, then I'm still not wrong because reality has failed me. Reality is overrated.
|
|
#
?
Jan 20, 2018 20:13
|
|
|
Scruffpuff posted:he's enabling more mentally ill to be scammed. Good and fair point.
|
|
#
?
Jan 20, 2018 20:14
|
|
|
|
|
#
?
Jan 20, 2018 20:15
|
|
|
I love that I have this as a looking glass to see how hosed in the head these people can be and that they are nowhere near my daily interactions with people. If these people were in charge of anything sharper than a mop bucket, then they would be dangerous.
|
|
#
?
Jan 20, 2018 20:21
|
|
|
Jason Sextro posted:The whole thing is a Greek chorus away from being an actual Greek tragedy (or comedy, I suppose) Tragicomedy?
|
|
#
?
Jan 20, 2018 20:27
|
|
|
This is the unroll thread of my take on the latest Crytek response in the CryTek v CIG lawsuit. https://threadreaderapp.com/thread/954724633344913408.html ----------------
|
|
#
?
Jan 20, 2018 20:28
|
|
|
D_Smart posted:This is the unroll thread of my take on the latest Crytek response in the CryTek v CIG lawsuit. I'm calling it that you wrote: "They're hosed!"
|
|
#
?
Jan 20, 2018 20:29
|
|
|
If it may please the Court, I submit that inter alia Leonard French owns two doggos who are both good doggos, and ask for leniency to be shown to him ipso facto quid pro quo
|
|
#
?
Jan 20, 2018 20:32
|
|
|
Holy poo poo  piss!
|
|
#
?
Jan 20, 2018 20:36
|
|
|
D_Smart posted:This is the unroll thread of my take on the latest Crytek response in the CryTek v CIG lawsuit. I'm curious about your sourcing on this part: quote:AFAIK, while has has a website, French no longer practices law. He represented Imagos in court within the last month.
|
|
#
?
Jan 20, 2018 20:38
|
|
|
https://i.imgur.com/w0p9fbA.gifv
|
|
#
?
Jan 20, 2018 20:38
|
|
|
XK posted:I'm curious about your sourcing on this part: This; also now after all the Imagos/Alex Mauer stuff is finished, he was in talks with Imagos for working for them as general counsel, so maybe he got the job and put his private practice on hold 
|
|
#
?
Jan 20, 2018 20:47
|
|
|
Lack of Gravitas posted:This; also now after all the Imagos/Alex Mauer stuff is finished, he was in talks with Imagos for working for them as general counsel, so maybe he got the job and put his private practice on hold That would still be practicing, though. As long as you have bar certification, and have, or have had, clients that you've represented within a reasonable past, you should be considered as practicing.
|
|
#
?
Jan 20, 2018 20:55
|
|
|
XK posted:I'm curious about your sourcing on this part: Back when he did the first video, I had read that he no longer practiced, and had opted to do his videos etc. Then someone said it had something to do with not having liability insurance or something. If he is in-house counsel somewhere, then it stands to reason that he wouldn't be practicing. ----------------
|
|
#
?
Jan 20, 2018 20:57
|
|
|
Mirificus posted:https://twitter.com/iq_derek/status/954668305620533248 Lol this guy is literally:  
peter gabriel fucked around with this message at 20:59 on Jan 20, 2018 |
|
#
?
Jan 20, 2018 20:57
|
|
|
XK posted:That would still be practicing, though. As long as you have bar certification, and have, or have had, clients that you've represented within a reasonable past, you should be considered as practicing. Being in-house counsel isn't considering practicing in the general meaning of the term. Anyway, I just asked him. https://twitter.com/dsmart/status/954806204810788865 ----------------
|
|
#
?
Jan 20, 2018 21:02
|
|
|
D_Smart posted:Back when he did the first video, I had read that he no longer practiced, and had opted to do his videos etc. Then someone said it had something to do with not having liability insurance or something. I know he was entertaining the possibility of being in-house for Imagos. I guess the definition of practicing hinges on whether he's only working for Imagos, and taking outside cases or not? Even if he is exclusive (EXCLUSIVE) to Imagos, isn't that still practicing?
|
|
#
?
Jan 20, 2018 21:03
|
|
|
XK posted:I know he was entertaining the possibility of being in-house for Imagos. I guess the definition of practicing hinges on whether he's only working for Imagos, and taking outside cases or not? Even if he is exclusive (EXCLUSIVE) to Imagos, isn't that still practicing? If he is exclusively working for Imagos, does that mean he can sue them if they hire any other lawyers?
|
|
#
?
Jan 20, 2018 21:07
|
|
|
 peter gabriel posted:Lol this guy is literally: 
|
|
#
?
Jan 20, 2018 21:07
|
|
|
D_Smart posted:Being in-house counsel isn't considering practicing in the general meaning of the term. The real question here is when is he going to stop practising and start doing? I mean, c'mon son
|
|
#
?
Jan 20, 2018 21:09
|
|
|
D_Smart posted:Being in-house counsel isn't considering practicing in the general meaning of the term. Hmm. I'm not sure if being in-house counsel really discounts somebody from being practicing, as long as they are doing legal things. Microsoft has in-house attorneys, are they not practicing law? Wiki-ing it up here: quote:In its most general sense, the practice of law involves giving legal advice to clients, drafting legal documents for clients, and representing clients in legal negotiations and court proceedings such as lawsuits, and is applied to the professional services of a lawyer or attorney at law, barrister, solicitor, or civil law notary. I think it would generally be accepted that as long as he is performing duties relevant to a lawyer, and is bar certified, he is practicing. XK fucked around with this message at 21:20 on Jan 20, 2018 |
|
#
?
Jan 20, 2018 21:11
|
|
|
|
|
#
?
Jan 20, 2018 21:14
|
|
|
I think what happened here is Mr French looked at Star Citizen and thought 'these guys buy any old poo poo' so set up a Patreon and away he went
|
|
#
?
Jan 20, 2018 21:14
|
|
|
Oh poo poo, now it's the 'Is French exclusive?' thread.
|
|
#
?
Jan 20, 2018 21:20
|
|
|
AP posted:
I can't really comment on this particular legal matter.
|
|
#
?
Jan 20, 2018 21:24
|
|
|
Top voted post on r/sc: CR's signature and handwriting for the Crytek GLA is absolutely exquisite On a scale of 1-10. How cultlike is this MoMA?
|
|
#
?
Jan 20, 2018 21:26
|
|
|
TheAgent posted:swag: actually made by CIG, sent out to china/taiwan But they don’t really make their swag either. They source that stuff mostly in Asia and Sandi talked before about her longstanding personal connection with “Jackie” in China who handles the op. Safe bet is she or her family have a stake in that operation with ties that pre-date CIG’s incorporation. Why else center distribution there when you have nearly zero customers living in your country of distribution and hundreds of thousands on the other side of the planet? It just smacks of more double-dipping and the backers will never know anyway... They’re too busy coming up with cooler merch themselves and cutting CIG out of that money loop with private sales because most would prefer not to wear giant tacky art tarps and kitschy star kitten crap and the actress will never know anyway. Tank Boy Ken posted:I'm calling it that you wrote: "They're hosed!"  Scruffpuff posted:Basically, he's compromised, and as such is unable to provide impartial advice. When he claims he is doing so, invariably in CIG's favour, he's enabling more mentally ill to be scammed. French fits the bill of the classic Star Citizen sideshow nontroversy that still somehow turns into a swirling vortex of illusory consequence. Like the Jake INN deal from some time back. Zealots and haters rush with swords and pitchforks to surround the inconsequential subject and a raging battle breaks out, so much emotion and drama and the stakes couldn’t possibly be lower but victory MUST be secured anyway because reasons... G0RF fucked around with this message at 21:42 on Jan 20, 2018 |
|
#
?
Jan 20, 2018 21:27
|
|
|
Virtual Captain posted:Top voted post on r/sc:  Mrs. Snyder's 2nd grade class. P.S. I want to drive big trucks when I grow up.
|
|
#
?
Jan 20, 2018 21:30
|
|
|
ManofManyAliases posted:I can't really comment on this particular legal matter. can I quote the poo poo out of this?
|
|
#
?
Jan 20, 2018 21:32
|
|
|
Speaking unlawfully MoMA, have you ever had a sex dream that felt like a Crytek ship promo?
|
|
#
?
Jan 20, 2018 21:33
|
|
|
I actually do want the current list of shell corps. Who has them? Throw it down.
|
|
#
?
Jan 20, 2018 21:34
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 19, 2024 01:35 |
|
|
what would prevent you from commenting on this particular legal matter?ManofManyAliases posted:For Legal reasons, I have to state that I am NOT Toast.
|
|
#
?
Jan 20, 2018 21:35
|
|
