Roblox Sues YouTuber For $1.6 Million Over Terrorizing Kids Platform (kotaku.com) 90
Roblox is taking notorious YouTuber Benjamin "Ruben Sim" Simon to court over his alleged attacks on the gaming social media platform and its young fans. A lawsuit filed in California court on Tuesday wants the longtime banned player to pay $1.6 million in damages and stop harassing Roblox employees and players. From a report: First reported by Polygon, the lawsuit contains a number of allegations against Simon, who has been making and profiting from Roblox videos since 2010. Those videos run the gamut, featuring him doing everything from sexually harassing players he encounters in the game to making public "terrorist threats" against the company during its annual convention. According to Roblox, this led the company to have to temporarily shut down its Roblox Developers Conference in San Francisco last month after Simon reportedly posted about police searching for "Islamic Extremists" at the event. The company claims this cost it $50,000 to investigate the false reports.
If he really did such things (Score:1)
Re: If he really did such things (Score:4)
According to the lawsuit (Score:4, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
This guy called in a fake bomb threat. I'm not entirely sure why he isn't in jail right now because last I heard that was a crime
No, a message was posted on his twitter (frm lawsuit https://www.scribd.com/documen... [scribd.com])
18. Then, during RDC 2021, Defendant Simon publicly posted a terrorist bomb threat to his Twitter account, knowing that the threat was false: “BREAKING: San Francisco Police are currently searching for notorious Islamic Extremist Julius Al Mohammad. If you see this individual at RDC please call 911 immediately.” Defendant Simon posted an image below this text purporting to depict the fictitious “Islamic Extremist” as having posted a YouTube video titled “SOMEONE BLOW UP ROBLOX NOW!” Defendant Simon made related posts,including: “Don’t Come to RDC Tomorrow.”
Proving beyond a reasonable doubt that he even posted the message himself is difficult at best, a lawsuit is justice a la Judge Judy. Also the guy seem to be making a living messing with roblox since he was banned some six years ago making videos and getting companies and individuals to sponsor him so I don't think it's much of a stretch to believe they intentionally want to target him financially although they might wan
Re: (Score:2)
Also the guy seem to be making a living messing with roblox
If I started messing up with an airline or restaurant after getting banned, sooner or later I would get my ass sued for damages and harassment, and it would be right for the target company (a victim) in doing so.
Whether our legal framework allows addressing such issues is beyond the point of what is right and wrong, which is why I always say we have a legal system, not a justice system. These are two different things.
Re: (Score:2)
Is it not possible to bring a private prosecution in the US?
Could be an evidence issue. Criminal charges need a much higher standard of proof than civil claims.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
According to TFS, he made videos about his alleged crimes. Evidence should be easy to get that way.
Re: (Score:2)
Is it not possible to bring a private prosecution in the US?
It depends on where you are. I only know how it works in California. Here you may execute a citizen's arrest if you witness a misdemeanor or have reason to believe a felony has occurred. (A police officer can execute an arrest if they merely believe a misdemeanor has occurred; they can also detain you for questioning if they believe any crime has taken place and you know about it or were involved.) A citizen can theoretically use necessary force to execute an arrest but this is really just for their own pro
Re: (Score:2)
This guy called in a fake bomb threat. I'm not entirely sure why he isn't in jail right now because last I heard that was a crime. Meanwhile there's a guy going around shouting the n-word and macing random people and somehow he still hasn't been arrested. Seriously one of the police actually for if they're not going to take care of stuff like this?
Police inertia. Some of it is out of necessity, as the police (by faulty laws) cannot act until a physical event takes place.
This on works "fine" on paper and for the general case when reasonable people are involved. However, it has nasty consequences. I know of cases in real life when people have been sexually harassed and terrorized online (to the point of people having to quit their jobs and get out of town), but the police could never quite do anything because the harassment was online or worded in su
Re: According to the lawsuit (Score:2)
The police are "defunded", remember?
And instead of fixing the police, the solution is to have fewer officers on the street to deal with crime. The militarized mindset gets more extreme because now the ones left have to act like soldiers just so they might be able to come home at night. Fucking brilliant. :-(
Re: (Score:1)
No, it's not freedom of speech to be able to say what ever stupid shit pops into your head. If it's a threat, terrorizing, racist, sexually harassing, etc, you don't get to do that without dealing with the outcome. Hope this dumbass gets to spend quite awhile in jail.
Re: (Score:2)
No, it's not freedom of speech to be able to say what ever stupid shit pops into your head. If it's a threat, terrorizing, racist, sexually harassing, etc, you don't get to do that without dealing with the outcome. Hope this dumbass gets to spend quite awhile in jail.
Most of that won't get the government to arrest you in the U.S. regardless of what's said and the other half needs to be quite specific. The public is always free to judge a person how they will, but the first amendment was always about restricting what the government can do. The people are free to act how they wish.
Since this appears to be a civil suit there's no threat of jail. I haven't read beyond the summary to know any of the specifics of everything being alleged, but even civil suits are hard to l
Re:Freedom of Speech! (Score:5, Insightful)
Freedom of speech doesn't imply you are free of the consequences.
There is a reason slander, libel, etc, are torts.
i.e.
If you yell fire in a theater that REALLY is on fire then that is NOT abusing freedom of speech.
If you yell fire in a theater that ISN'T on fire then you ARE abusing your freedom of speech and can be charged for inducing panic (which in turn can be responsible for causing destruction of private property.)
Context (and intent) matters.
Re: Freedom of Speech! (Score:2)
if grandma is a credible threat and you intentionally misled your family, then maybe it is a crime. if someone fell and hurt themselves then you best get a good lawyer to defend the civil suit.
Re: (Score:3)
We need to get away from the “yelling fire in a crowded theater” analogy [wikipedia.org], given that the case that originally coined the phrase was later partially overturned, thus making it legal to yell “Fire!” in a crowded theater. You still can’t incite lawless behavior, such as calling for a riot, but there’s nothing lawless about people fleeing a fictitious fire, so even dangerous speech like that is actually allowed under current precedent in the US.
Re: Freedom of Speech! (Score:2)
It should, however, be noted that if you were to yell about a fire and someone was seriously injured in the ensuing panic, they could probably successfully sue you. Perhaps the theater could also sue you for costing them money and damaging their reputation. But, as you note, that is not the same thing as criminal charges.
In these free speech discussions the distinctions between criminal guilt and liability become muddled. As does the distinction between censorship and consequences.
Re: (Score:2)
was later partially overturned, thus making it legal to yell “Fire!” in a crowded theater.
No it wasn't. There was a simple test criteria added still very much making it illegal to yell "Fire!" in a crowded theater, as the OP said: context and intent matters.
The "overturning" only served to clarify the intent.
Re: (Score:2)
No it wasn't. There was a simple test criteria added still very much making it illegal to yell "Fire!" in a crowded theater, as the OP said: context and intent matters.
The "overturning" only served to clarify the intent.
Yes, it was partially overturned [wikipedia.org]. The Brandenburg “imminent lawless action” test you’re talking about replaced the “clear and present danger” test used in the formulation of the crowded theater analogy. While similar, the Brandenburg test does not clarify the intent, as you incorrectly suggest, but rather clarifies that the incited action must be lawless in nature. A riot would be lawless, hence why you can’t incite people to engage in one, but departing a theater quickly
Re: (Score:2)
Thanks. I thought lawless referred to the intent of the person yelling fire.
Re: (Score:2)
Don't catch you slippin' up
Re: Freedom of Speech! (Score:2)
This dude basically "SWATTED" the convention. Last I heard making false police reports is a jailable offense.
Original report and lawsuit (Score:4, Informative)
The article credits the original report https://www.polygon.com/227993... [polygon.com] which links to the full lawsuit https://www.scribd.com/documen... [scribd.com]
Ya, but they're conflicted. (Score:2)
The Roblox Market Team is like, there's no such thing as bad publicity ...
Re: Ya, but they're conflicted. (Score:2)
Yeah, they might send over a strongly worded letter, which is about all they can do, unless he physically goes to China.
roblox is shit (Score:4, Interesting)
I used to work in mobile games, in fact a lot of my friends went over to roblox.
Roblox is like any other p2w scheme. They rely on gambling triggers, they only let you win if you pay. They also make it next to impossible to get a refund if your kid steals your credit card to buy robucks. The only difference is they're a platform, they don't make the games, but they do take their cut. They also market specifically to kids which makes them especially sleazy.
Fortunately some kids are smart. My 12 year old started using autoclickers at a young age and has since graduated to python using ImageGrab and OpenCV to lvl up on some of the games.
Re: (Score:3)
"They also make it next to impossible to get a refund if your kid steals your credit card to buy robucks."
Good lord. It's your fucking card, you watch over it. Pursue a reversal through the card provider. Or have your kid charged with theft. Pick a lane.
I wonder why there's no "my kid bought it when I wasn't looking" reason for return on Amazon.
Re: (Score:1)
"They also make it next to impossible to get a refund if your kid steals your credit card to buy robucks."
Good lord. It's your fucking card, you watch over it.
It's not reasonable to expect someone to have tight control over their wallet 24 hours/day.
My wallet is typically in my coat or jacket pocket. When I come home, I hang up that jacket by the door. That is perfectly reasonable.
What's not reasonable is for me to take the wallet out of my jacket pocket and put it in a safe or lockbox somewhere, every time I come home, and then retrieve it every time I leave the house.
It's also not reasonable for me to constantly watch my jacket to ensure no one is going through
Re: (Score:2)
If you have kids that are stealing from you, Roblox (or similar) is the least of your problems.
Re: (Score:2)
Sure. But that has nothing to do with my comment or the one I responded to.
Re: roblox is shit (Score:2)
then you'd go to your credit card company and reverse those charges. and dispute the nasty credit report they're likely to file. maybe take them to small claims court if this case can be served in your home state.
Re: (Score:2)
If you have kids that are stealing from you, Roblox (or similar) is the least of your problems.
So if roblox uses arrays of psychologists to make a product that is so addictive that it pushes your kid to steal from you then the problem is not with roblox?
Re: (Score:3)
Only partly, especially when you consider how many children are NOT stealing from their parents.
Re: (Score:2)
So you want to externalize the cost and responsibility of the behaviour of you and your child with respect to your credit card.
Got it.
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
It's not reasonable to expect someone to have tight control over their wallet 24 hours/day.
Disagree. It is fundamentally possible. People do it with guns all the time. It's not even expensive to institute some halfway decent security for small items any more, although there are lots of shit safes nobody should ever use.
Re: roblox is shit (Score:2)
I learned from an early age not to touch mommy and daddy's wallet. Consequences for doing so ment a swift and severe punishment.
If your kid does not know this, then you got some serious parenting issues.
Re:roblox is shit (Score:5, Interesting)
I used to play plenty of games on Roblox with my daughter. From what I've seen pay to win games a few and far between. I guess they never reach the top of the charts. Most things you can pay for are cosmetic, which is, of course, still temping.
Re: (Score:1)
Fortnite is entirely cosmetic - skins, etc.
Roblox you pay for the games on the platform, which are independently developed. Some appear to be pretty good - multiplayer Theme Park like games for example, or other simulation titles (airport builder, etc). There are plenty of free options.
Pay to win? Haven't seen much of that either. I'm sure there is something there, but that's probably a money laundering project not aimed at the children. ;)
Re: roblox is shit (Score:2)
Kids that age want anything that make them look "cool" in the eyes of their peers.
It's a stupid virtual skin to adults, but it's a status symbol to kids.
I grew up in the 80s, and showing off non functional cheap plastic fad shit made you "cool" back then.
Re: (Score:2)
Oh good to know. For a moment I thought we should be getting angry about someone calling in bomb threats and harassing kids, but I see it's okay now because you don't like the business model of the company he was doing it to.
Re: roblox is shit (Score:2)
Roblox is a crooked scheme, but two wrongs don't make a right here.
Play stupid games (Score:2)
Win stupid prizes?
The game in this case is being a deplorable influencer.
Re: Play stupid games (Score:2)
"Hey! Look at Mee! I'm special!"
Career description in a nutshell.
Re: (Score:2)
Like and subscribe. Click the links to my sponsors. And "donate" to my crowd sourcing campaign.
We're approaching late-stage capitalism, and something is going to give. I doubt we'll revert to the old ways of doing things. And I hope we won't continue down a path that leads to global economic collapse. I do feel a small amount of responsibility being at the center of a lot of this tech garbage, both in physical location but also in my job history.
Re: Play stupid games (Score:2)
I don't think any kid is going to want to go work in the factory like in the old days.
So now we are shifting into an economy built on bullshit such "like and subscribe", books, theories, "critical thinking" classes, "liberal arts", internet fads, more invented mental problems and disorders for kids, and more experimental dtugs to force on those kids.
We are ending up as a society full of weak and soft librarians and bookworms, who happens to make a whole lot of mental drugs to push on people. Everywh
Re: (Score:2)
I don't think any kid is going to want to go work in the factory like in the old days.
When I was 20-something you could still work in a factory and support a family. When I did it, the work was less emotionally demanding that tech jobs, and I have plenty of free time on the weekends. But we had a race to the bottom with globalization. We now compete on who is willing to accept the lowest standard of living.
"critical thinking" classes, "liberal arts"
actually those are useful. A well rounded education makes for informed people and informed voters. People who are easily swayed by a mob mentality is exactly how civilizations commit atro
Re: Play stupid games (Score:2)
"#We are ending up as a society full of weak and soft librarians and bookworms#
I find your anti-intellectualism to be disappointing. A throwback to an earlier time. And not productive to putting things back on track."
A lot of the i'ntellectualism' being produced nowadays is the kind of garbage seen on "The View"
I have nothing against education or intellectualism, but so much of it is being used to dumb down and manipulate the populace, and to pot one against another.
I've lost track o
Hypocracy (Score:1)
Roblox says they ban political and romantic content, but they they are gay friendly?
How does that work?
Forget the lawsuit (Score:2)
This moron needs to be kept in a mental hospital.