By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - Nintendo Discussion - Bayonetta OG Voice Actress Calls For Boycott of Bayonetta 3

Vodacixi said:
DonFerrari said:

I hardly think it is the right thing to take sides and blindly believe just because someone called oneself a victim, to many reputations and even lives were lost because of false claims and accusations of crime.

I would say far more lives were destroyed or lost because people called out for help and nobody believed them or cared about them. But anyway... If someone asks me for help and I feel he/she is vulnerable, they will get my help. I don't really think "What if they are lying?". No, I just try to help. I think it's very normal. Maybe they're lying. Maybe bad stuff happens because of that lie. But I don't think I should feel bad for it. It's not my fault for believing them. It's the fault of the person who orchestrated the whole thing.

I don't know, it all seems very clear in my head xD

And the reason you think she was vulnerable (this isn't a case of someone possibly suffering domestic violence, sex traffic, etc) that you don't need to hear the two sides to be sure she is the victim would be?



duduspace11 "Well, since we are estimating costs, Pokemon Red/Blue did cost Nintendo about $50m to make back in 1996"

http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=8808363

Mr Puggsly: "Hehe, I said good profit. You said big profit. Frankly, not losing money is what I meant by good. Don't get hung up on semantics"

http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=9008994

Azzanation: "PS5 wouldn't sold out at launch without scalpers."

Around the Network
Leynos said:
Vodacixi said:

I would say far more lives were destroyed or lost because people called out for help and nobody believed them or cared about them. But anyway... If someone asks me for help and I feel he/she is vulnerable, they will get my help. I don't really think "What if they are lying?". No, I just try to help. I think it's very normal. Maybe they're lying. Maybe bad stuff happens because of that lie. But I don't think I should feel bad for it. It's not my fault for believing them. It's the fault of the person who orchestrated the whole thing.

I don't know, it all seems very clear in my head xD

As clear as swamp water.

Ok



DonFerrari said:
Vodacixi said:

I would say far more lives were destroyed or lost because people called out for help and nobody believed them or cared about them. But anyway... If someone asks me for help and I feel he/she is vulnerable, they will get my help. I don't really think "What if they are lying?". No, I just try to help. I think it's very normal. Maybe they're lying. Maybe bad stuff happens because of that lie. But I don't think I should feel bad for it. It's not my fault for believing them. It's the fault of the person who orchestrated the whole thing.

I don't know, it all seems very clear in my head xD

And the reason you think she was vulnerable (this isn't a case of someone possibly suffering domestic violence, sex traffic, etc) that you don't need to hear the two sides to be sure she is the victim would be?

Oh, now there are moments when you don't have to hear both sides to trust someone. That's some developement.

She was an individual that was allegedly being mistreated by a big company. The situation she was exposing was not very hard to believe taking into account that it is well known that videogame voice actors are usually paid low and work in poor conditions (in fact, after Hellena's tweet, quite a few voice actors jumped on to tell their particular stories).

And... I don't think I have anything else to say on this topic for now.



Hiku said:
sc94597 said:

In most jurisdictions sharing other people's offers is more harshly punished than sharing one's own (which in some jurisdictions, but not the U.K from what I gather) is a full legal right which an NDA can't enforceably infringe. 

Things become more complicated though if they are protecting themselves or the company's image from a lie. I doubt this would be a simple case, but Platinum probably has a higher risk in the situation.

Ah, that makes sense. 

One reason I asked if they'd also be off the hook if Hellena was, is because a punishment more harsh than nothing could still end up having to be nothing, if there's nothing enforacle about it. But I guess that would depend on the details of the NDA they signed, and/or the laws of the countries that apply.

Can you not have clauses in an NDA that say something to the effect of, if the other party discloses any of the information that falls under NDA, they relenquish any confidentiality priveledges, and the company will be in its full right to also disclose the details?

Because if that's possible, it seems like a no brainer to include that in these types of NDA's?

JWeinCom:

Don't believe they're saying it would be non-enforceable, just that it might be depending on local law. For example, if there was a part of the contract saying "you are not to say anything if you are sexually harassed by Kamiya-san" that would almost certainly be against local law everywhere. 

The main difference in your theoretical situation would be that the translator did not sign the contract. They themselves are probably not covered by the NDA with Taylor, although they probably have their own NDA with Platinum. Taylor could not sue them personally for breach of contract, probably, but Platinum could, probably.  But, Taylor could probably sue the translator for public disclosure of private facts or something along those lines (assuming for simplicity's sake that Taylor never said anything publicly about the negotiations). Or defamation if what they said was not true. 

Taylor could also probably sue Platinum games, on a theory of respondeat superior, where an employee is held liable for the actions of its employees, or if Platinum negligently supervised or trained the translator. You can try to argue that the translator was acting on behalf of platinum, that they did not do enough to make sure translators respected NDAs, or so on. There is a lot of nuance there, so it's impossible to say what would happen. 

Not sure if that answered your question, but there probably isn't a clean answer, cause there are a lot of overlapping areas of law and legal theories here. 

@JWeinCom 
Yes, I didn't expect there to be a clear answer, but I was looking for some insight like this, so thanks for that.
Though since you work in law as well, I'd ask you the same question as above.

Can you not have clauses in an NDA that say something to the effect of, if the other party discloses any of the information that falls under NDA, they relenquish any confidentiality priveledges, and the company will be in its full right to also disclose the details?

Because if that's possible, it seems like a no brainer to include that in these types of NDA's?

To be clear, I don't work in this field at all. It's stuff you study the basics of in law school, but my knowledge is limited.

In general, I don't think that would have to be put in an NDA. When someone breaches a contract, you naturally have the right to take action that would prevent damage from that breach. If you and I had a contract that I would send you 500 dollars and you'd send me a PS5, and I don't send you the money, you don't have to send me the PS5. That's breaching your responsibility, but I obviously can't sue you for that.

Similarly, if we both agree not to discuss a certain matter publicly, and I discuss it publicly, then I couldn't sue you if you revealed information to defend yourself. 

So, if the only agreement they made was not to discuss any offers, and she said, "I was only offered 4,000 dollars" I would think that Platinum can show part of the contract that shows she was offered more. I think it's implied for the most part. But a lot of details can complicate things.



Vodacixi said:
DonFerrari said:

And the reason you think she was vulnerable (this isn't a case of someone possibly suffering domestic violence, sex traffic, etc) that you don't need to hear the two sides to be sure she is the victim would be?

Oh, now there are moments when you don't have to hear both sides to trust someone. That's some developement.

She was an individual that was allegedly being mistreated by a big company. The situation she was exposing was not very hard to believe taking into account that it is well known that videogame voice actors are usually paid low and work in poor conditions (in fact, after Hellena's tweet, quite a few voice actors jumped on to tell their particular stories).

And... I don't think I have anything else to say on this topic for now.

Thank god you aren't a judge

"There are times you don't need to hear both sides to trust someone".... even if that someone doesn't present any evidence, let's just condemn the other side.



duduspace11 "Well, since we are estimating costs, Pokemon Red/Blue did cost Nintendo about $50m to make back in 1996"

http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=8808363

Mr Puggsly: "Hehe, I said good profit. You said big profit. Frankly, not losing money is what I meant by good. Don't get hung up on semantics"

http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=9008994

Azzanation: "PS5 wouldn't sold out at launch without scalpers."

Around the Network
JWeinCom said:
Hiku said:

Ah, that makes sense. 

One reason I asked if they'd also be off the hook if Hellena was, is because a punishment more harsh than nothing could still end up having to be nothing, if there's nothing enforacle about it. But I guess that would depend on the details of the NDA they signed, and/or the laws of the countries that apply.

Can you not have clauses in an NDA that say something to the effect of, if the other party discloses any of the information that falls under NDA, they relenquish any confidentiality priveledges, and the company will be in its full right to also disclose the details?

Because if that's possible, it seems like a no brainer to include that in these types of NDA's?

JWeinCom:

Don't believe they're saying it would be non-enforceable, just that it might be depending on local law. For example, if there was a part of the contract saying "you are not to say anything if you are sexually harassed by Kamiya-san" that would almost certainly be against local law everywhere. 

The main difference in your theoretical situation would be that the translator did not sign the contract. They themselves are probably not covered by the NDA with Taylor, although they probably have their own NDA with Platinum. Taylor could not sue them personally for breach of contract, probably, but Platinum could, probably.  But, Taylor could probably sue the translator for public disclosure of private facts or something along those lines (assuming for simplicity's sake that Taylor never said anything publicly about the negotiations). Or defamation if what they said was not true. 

Taylor could also probably sue Platinum games, on a theory of respondeat superior, where an employee is held liable for the actions of its employees, or if Platinum negligently supervised or trained the translator. You can try to argue that the translator was acting on behalf of platinum, that they did not do enough to make sure translators respected NDAs, or so on. There is a lot of nuance there, so it's impossible to say what would happen. 

Not sure if that answered your question, but there probably isn't a clean answer, cause there are a lot of overlapping areas of law and legal theories here. 

@JWeinCom 
Yes, I didn't expect there to be a clear answer, but I was looking for some insight like this, so thanks for that.
Though since you work in law as well, I'd ask you the same question as above.

Can you not have clauses in an NDA that say something to the effect of, if the other party discloses any of the information that falls under NDA, they relenquish any confidentiality priveledges, and the company will be in its full right to also disclose the details?

Because if that's possible, it seems like a no brainer to include that in these types of NDA's?

To be clear, I don't work in this field at all. It's stuff you study the basics of in law school, but my knowledge is limited.

In general, I don't think that would have to be put in an NDA. When someone breaches a contract, you naturally have the right to take action that would prevent damage from that breach. If you and I had a contract that I would send you 500 dollars and you'd send me a PS5, and I don't send you the money, you don't have to send me the PS5. That's breaching your responsibility, but I obviously can't sue you for that.

Similarly, if we both agree not to discuss a certain matter publicly, and I discuss it publicly, then I couldn't sue you if you revealed information to defend yourself. 

So, if the only agreement they made was not to discuss any offers, and she said, "I was only offered 4,000 dollars" I would think that Platinum can show part of the contract that shows she was offered more. I think it's implied for the most part. But a lot of details can complicate things.

I would say the problem here would be PG cirumventing that by leaking a document so others will defend them in their place (again, this is speculation as we would be supposing someone in PG leaked for this intent). And also if PG would show false document to sustain their claim them I believe even if Taylor had broke their NDA PG could be sued (and sure if Taylor was lying about the offer she can be sued as well).



duduspace11 "Well, since we are estimating costs, Pokemon Red/Blue did cost Nintendo about $50m to make back in 1996"

http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=8808363

Mr Puggsly: "Hehe, I said good profit. You said big profit. Frankly, not losing money is what I meant by good. Don't get hung up on semantics"

http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=9008994

Azzanation: "PS5 wouldn't sold out at launch without scalpers."

This is a complicated topic with no clear "right approach", but I think it's kinda fair to initially take the side of the supposed victim against a corporation as long as you don't contribute in blindly attacking and defaming their supposed oppressor. The latter should be reserved for until you hear both sides and the evidence against one of them is very strong. The majority of people raising complaints tend to be real victims. If we don't open our hearts to them, it'll make it 10 times harder for actual victims to come out and tell us their stories. The consequence of our sympathy is bad apples (entitled liars) taking advantage of us, but unfortunately the alternative is even worse (corporations and the rich abusing emplyees/contractors without contemplating the consequences).

Sympathizing with a potential victim and demonizing their oppressor are two different things. You can take the side of the supposed victim, but don't be too passionate about it.



Vodacixi said:

After all that has transpired since my last comment in this thread... I have no shame in eating my words in favor of Hellena Taylor if what Bloomberg and J. Schreier say is true. Screw her if Platinum actually wanted to give her 15k+.

However, whathever ends up happening, I will not regret believing and supporting Hellena Taylor. I will always support potential victims. Specially if what they are bringing up seems legit (which I think it was). I rather be fooled a thousand times for being nice than being skeptical all the time and then having regrets.

I'm not the same way, I don't believe anything without data/information.  Having said that kudos for owning it and I have respect for your straight forward honesty, though I'm not the same.  Too many liars in the world.



I found this randomly on Twitter and I think this person explained this situation the best. I recommend everyone here to read it if u have the time, it's very logical and well written. It's more than just describing the situation of this incident, I think it also explains the detailed parts well that a lot of us discussed here.

https://www.patreon.com/posts/everything-once-73616074?utm_medium=social&utm_source=twitter&utm_campaign=postshare_creator



Shatts said:

I found this randomly on Twitter and I think this person explained this situation the best. I recommend everyone here to read it if u have the time, it's very logical and well written. It's more than just describing the situation of this incident, I think it also explains the detailed parts well that a lot of us discussed here.

https://www.patreon.com/posts/everything-once-73616074?utm_medium=social&utm_source=twitter&utm_campaign=postshare_creator

Pretty well written. Except for the end. People really cant leave politics out of anything these days.