Jump to content

Raymer Talkes About Dn On Stars.


Recommended Posts

I'm just glad that both ends are handling their differences like adults. Daniel won't shut up about the lawsuit, and rambles on and on in his posts and blogs about how stupid the 7 people are and what idiots they are for suing the WPT. Then Raymer makes his petty comments about how happy he is that Daniel is out of the Main Event. And then Daniel follows up with his cute "fat boobs/African children" post. Nice job guys - well played!! :club:
Your reply wasn't much better.. Thank you and please try again.Good luck.
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 125
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

I think you should go breast feed African babies with your huge boobs and STFU. How's that?
I can only wish. :club:
Link to post
Share on other sites

How about a little non-licking DNs balls perspective.I can easily see why Raymer would get pretty damn annoyed about this.IIRC, Raymer was a patent attorney, thus fairly well versed in the law. He's fairly well placed to assess the risk/reward ratio of the lawsuit based on his skills and knowledge. He certainly wouldn't bother unless its something he feels pretty strongly about. The manner of DNs comments were pretty frivolous, which on its own would be something that would anger someone who felt strongly about the issue.Then along comes DN, who apart from asking other people is pretty much clueless about whats involved, and pretty much trashes the whole thing. The equivalent in this forum would be an absolute donk trying to tell DN how to play (something which happens often enough). We've all seen how well people on this forum respond to that.In this case, when it comes to knowledge of the law, Raymer = DN, and DN = the donk.Though he's fairly ignorant in terms of the law, DN does have a pretty significant voice in terms of his profile. One of the ways in which the suit may have succeeded would be through sufficient negative publicity to make the WPT go for a settlement as a matter of expediency. DN speaking out has affected that balance, and therefore affected the outcome, which in likelihood will affect Raymers bottom line. Can't get much more personal than that regardless of the language used.As another aside, one of DNs arguments was that the WPT had never used peoples images in this manner, so why worry. Surely that would apply the other way. If they don't intend to make use of it, why would they keep the clause despite such opposition. Surely having Raymer, Hachem and Lederer on board would be somewhat +EV for the WPT, so why would they keep the clause in if they could get them on board unless they had something to gain - it just doesn't make sense. At the very least you could alter the agreement to make it so that they would only appear in the opening or closing credits or somesuch.Anyone who thinks the WPT has nothing to gain from this has obviously not considered the cost of the lawyers to fight the case - you don't pay that cost unless there is something serious at stake. This does mean DN is likely right in one thing - neither party will be likely to get a win out of this.

Link to post
Share on other sites
How about a little non-licking DNs balls perspective.I can easily see why Raymer would get pretty damn annoyed about this.IIRC, Raymer was a patent attorney, thus fairly well versed in the law. He's fairly well placed to assess the risk/reward ratio of the lawsuit based on his skills and knowledge. He certainly wouldn't bother unless its something he feels pretty strongly about. The manner of DNs comments were pretty frivolous, which on its own would be something that would anger someone who felt strongly about the issue.Then along comes DN, who apart from asking other people is pretty much clueless about whats involved, and pretty much trashes the whole thing. Though he's fairly ignorant in terms of the law, DN does have a pretty significant voice in terms of his profile. One of the ways in which the suit may have succeeded would be through sufficient negative publicity to make the WPT go for a settlement as a matter of expediency. DN speaking out has affected that balance, and therefore affected the outcome, which in likelihood will affect Raymers bottom line. Can't get much more personal than that regardless of the language used.The equivalent in this forum would be an absolute donk trying to tell DN how to play (something which happens often enough). We've all seen how well people on this forum respond to that.In this case, when it comes to knowledge of the law, Raymer = DN, and DN = the donk.As another aside, one of DNs arguments was that the WPT had never used peoples images in this manner, so why worry. Surely that would aply the other way. If they don't intend to make use of it, why would they keep the clause despite such opposition. Surely having Raymer, Hachem and Lederer on board would be somewhat +EV for the WPT, so why would they keep the clause in if they could get them on board unless they had something to gain - it just doesn't make sense. At the very least you could alter the agreement to make it so that they would only appear in the opening or closing credits or somesuch.Anyone who thinks the WPT has nothing to gain from this has obviously not considered the cost of the lawyers to fight the case - you don't pay that cost unless there is something serious at stake. This does mean DN is likely right in one thing - neither party will be likely to get a win out of this.
Yeah Raymer being an attorney won't hurt but being a patent attorney doesn't seem to help in this lawsuit.. Also I think Raymer/Hachem are only in the because of pokerstars.. If they were not sponsered by them then we would not be hearing from him but they had to get into it.. GL with the Raymer ball licking theory.
Link to post
Share on other sites
Every major sporting league(NFL, NBA, NHL, MLB, MLS) has complete control over how they use the images of any of their players captured before, during, or after a game.
That is incorrect. I can only comment on the NBA, since thats the only american sporting league I really follow, but I know Michael Jordan and Charles Barkley did not appear in many of the video games with an NBA licence in the 90s. This was due to them having deals in place for their own branded video games.As far as I've been able to discern, the basis for this particular case is much the same. All of the 7 that I'm aware of (Lederer, Duke, Raymer, and Hachem) all have their personal brands associated with a non-WPT videogame. If the WPT release is as stated, it would automatically give the WPT the right to use them in the WPT videogame.Furthermore, I believe the act of not defending intellectual property is considered to be the forfeiture of that intellectual property, thus these people have to challenge this in order to retain that IP.I don't actually care either way - its hardly going to affect me in any way - but I think its important to try and consider different aspects of the issue.The only real difference is that Daniel seems to have more personal relationship with some of the people involved in the WPT, and thus trusts them to do the right thing. The 7 in the suit obviously don't.
Link to post
Share on other sites

What does P-stars have to do with it?There are 4 FTs, 2 P-stars and 1 UB involved. All of these players are high profile, and nowadays almost every high profile player has some sort of sponsorship, so the fact that two of these players represent p-stars means nothing.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Yeah Raymer being an attorney won't hurt but being a patent attorney doesn't seem to help in this lawsuit.. Also I think Raymer/Hachem are only in the because of pokerstars.. If they were not sponsered by them then we would not be hearing from him but they had to get into it.. GL with the Raymer ball licking theory.
True about Raymer not necessarily having direct expertise in IP law, but he's certainly a hell of a lot more qualified to judge than DN. Perhaps Raymer = DN was not the right analogy -Raymer = a pretty decent pro but not really one of the absolute best?I don't really understand what PS would have to gain from the suit though?Surely for them the more exposure their players can get the better, regardless of its source? They would need something pretty enticing to go for that over the WPT publicity.From what I've seen of both Raymer and Hachem, I can't them doing this on behalf of PS. They've both seemed like fairly principled individuals, so I can easily see them doing this off their own bat if they believe. Whether the belief is wrong or not doesn't really matter.
Link to post
Share on other sites

Facts:99.999999% of people on this forum know next to nothing about the lawsuit against the WPT.Greg Raymer knows 1 TRILLION times more about U.S. (and International) law than Daniel Negreanu.U.S. Citizens are allowed to speak freely?????????????Hoosier was thirsty tonight.

Link to post
Share on other sites
That is incorrect. I can only comment on the NBA, since thats the only american sporting league I really follow, but I know Michael Jordan and Charles Barkley did not appear in many of the video games with an NBA licence in the 90s. This was due to them having deals in place for their own branded video games.
Untrue, they werent included in the video games because they werent part of the NBAPA, just like barry bonds doesnt appear in MLB games because he isnt part of the MLBPA. The reason they arent included is because those athletes chose to keep control of their own likeness by not signing with the union, thus not allowing the union to use their likeness. Trust me, Barkley's Shut Up and Jam and Michael Jordan: Chaos in the Windy City had nothing to do with them not being in the game. Wayne Gretzky had his own hockey game, but was included in competitors products as well due to him being part of the NHLPA. Therein lies the problem the players have with the WPT's waiver. They are basically allowing the WPT to use their likeness in any WPT product, meaning they could put DN into the next WPT game, simply because he has played in an event.
Link to post
Share on other sites
That is incorrect. I can only comment on the NBA, since thats the only american sporting league I really follow, but I know Michael Jordan and Charles Barkley did not appear in many of the video games with an NBA licence in the 90s. This was due to them having deals in place for their own branded video games.As far as I've been able to discern, the basis for this particular case is much the same. All of the 7 that I'm aware of (Lederer, Duke, Raymer, and Hachem) all have their personal brands associated with a non-WPT videogame. If the WPT release is as stated, it would automatically give the WPT the right to use them in the WPT videogame.Furthermore, I believe the act of not defending intellectual property is considered to be the forfeiture of that intellectual property, thus these people have to challenge this in order to retain that IP.I don't actually care either way - its hardly going to affect me in any way - but I think its important to try and consider different aspects of the issue.The only real difference is that Daniel seems to have more personal relationship with some of the people involved in the WPT, and thus trusts them to do the right thing. The 7 in the suit obviously don't.
Good stuff. Post more, Im not being sarcastic for once.Even though the decision will only have a small impact on myself, I agree that the issue HAS to be addressed. IMO, Daniel is wrong AINEC.
Untrue, they werent included in the video games because they werent part of the NBAPA, just like barry bonds doesnt appear in MLB games because he isnt part of the MLBPA. The reason they arent included is because those athletes chose to keep control of their own likeness by not signing with the union, thus not allowing the union to use their likeness. Trust me, Barkley's Shut Up and Jam and Michael Jordan: Chaos in the Windy City had nothing to do with them not being in the game. Wayne Gretzky had his own hockey game, but was included in competitors products as well due to him being part of the NHLPA. Therein lies the problem the players have with the WPT's waiver. They are basically allowing the WPT to use their likeness in any WPT product, meaning they could put DN into the next WPT game, simply because he has played in an event.
I like intelligent discussion on FCP boards.Don't expect contributions from me though. :club:
Link to post
Share on other sites
Untrue, they werent included in the video games because they werent part of the NBAPA, just like barry bonds doesnt appear in MLB games because he isnt part of the MLBPA. The reason they arent included is because those athletes chose to keep control of their own likeness by not signing with the union, thus not allowing the union to use their likeness. Trust me, Barkley's Shut Up and Jam and Michael Jordan: Chaos in the Windy City had nothing to do with them not being in the game. Wayne Gretzky had his own hockey game, but was included in competitors products as well due to him being part of the NHLPA. Therein lies the problem the players have with the WPT's waiver. They are basically allowing the WPT to use their likeness in any WPT product, meaning they could put DN into the next WPT game, simply because he has played in an event.
Interesting - thanks for that detail.I'd assume the unions would have negotiated a fee for their particiaption, and distributed a portion of that fee to all of their members. Jordan and Barkley would likely have taken the position (and correctly, particularly in Jordans case) that their involvement would be worth more than 1/312th (or whatever number of players was in at the time) of the value.I'd say thats pretty similar to what the 7 are thinking. Raymer and Hachem probably have a higher profile than almost any WPT winner ( maybe Greenstein, Doyle, Gus and DN as the possible exceptions?).Maybe its not about IP at all, but just trying to get what they believe is a fair slice of the cut.
Link to post
Share on other sites

What raymer does and doesnt know about law pertaining to the WPT case is irrelevant. Daniel's entitled to an opinion just as much as the next guy and surprise surprise what a suitable place to voice it on his own website.Raymer could have simply said I dont agree with daniels point of view and that would be that. wishing someone bad luck is poor form.Owning a law degree doesnt give you the right to be a wanker.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Note that I made no attempt to justify Raymers actions, just to try and point out some of the logic they possibly stemmed from.Quite frankly, both DN and Raymer seem quite childish about it, and DN has definitely shown an inclination over the time I've been following him to bear these petty little grudges. Raymer I haven't followed too closely, so can't really comment. I guess someone who inhabited 2+2 or some such could comment there.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Why don`t you lot go off And kiss Dans ring? Sycophantic Slags
amazing first post. you found the bold button, but failed to check for grammatical errors. well done.
Link to post
Share on other sites
Untrue, they werent included in the video games because they werent part of the NBAPA, just like barry bonds doesnt appear in MLB games because he isnt part of the MLBPA.
obviously that situation isn't a parallel though because the pro sports PA's are separate entities from the leagues. bonds doesn't have to join the MLBPA in order to play.the childish name calling wasn't necessary, but raymer is right in this case. DN doesn't know nearly enough about the suit to spout off like he has been. anyone who doubts that should listen to DN's simplistic blogs on the subject, then go back and listen to Howard's most recent appearance on the circuit.
Link to post
Share on other sites
amazing first post. you found the bold button, but failed to check for grammatical errors. well done.
No grammatical errors in My posts Nonce
Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

Announcements


×
×
  • Create New...