Support NeoGAF

[ChorizoPicozo]

About to release the sicarios.

wrong country

 

[tmlDan]

holy smokes another witness lol

 

[Ansphn]

So basically Phil is saying making one game exclusive is considered blocking and more expensive than spending 70 billion dollars on a whole Publisher.

 

[Vognerful]

That's exactly what a lot of people have been calling on and the FTC did exactly what they needed to do. Get it out of him that either this is fully legally binding to the organization, which many said wasn't true based on his word alone, or expose that there are loopholes to his oath that Microsoft can exploit. The other angle being that Spencer said they would put CoD on PS as long as Sony allows it. Not giving any clarity on if that means a conceivable scenario where Microsoft offers them bullshit terms and Sony declines, to which then Microsoft would use that as another loophole.

So who said that?

MS' lawyer?

I am sorry but I felt that the problem was that the lawyer wanted him to make the statement on Diablo, similar to CoD, not CoD specifically.

That is why he did not answer.

 

[thicc_girls_are_teh_best]

I hope the FTC replaces this dude lawyer; he didn't seem very confident in questioning Phil Spencer, very sorry to say

EDIT: Before anyone misconstrues, I mean in terms of him needing to be reminded by Phil Spencer on a question that was asked (allows the witness to assume a dominant position during the testimony to drive things more to their favor), and the judge cutting him off (gives an impression of weakness).

If he comes back up later hopefully things like those are avoided.

 

[Iced Arcade]

judge is like "alright man get"

 

[Little Chicken]

That Phil had to explain how M&A works to the FTC lawyer speaks volumes.

Even the judge moved him on - twice.

 

[Vognerful]

I hope the FTC replaces this dude lawyer; he didn't seem very confident in questioning Phil Spencer, very sorry to say

didn't he pretend that he took a commitment from spencer to ship CoD on Sony Cloud? before the judge cut him off?

 

[NickFire]

I am sorry but I felt that the problem was that the lawyer wanted him to make the statement on Diablo, similar to CoD, not CoD specifically.

That is why he did not answer.

His testimony is meaningless as a commitment if he gets overridden or changes his mind. Doesn’t matter what game he’s talking about.

 

[killatopak]

Sarah Bond replacing Phil as soon as this trial and merger happens is the strategy it seems. If you are bound by the rules then flip the board.

 

[tmlDan]

Dov Zimring on the stand

 

[DeepEnigma]

wrong country

 

[thicc_girls_are_teh_best]

didn't he pretend that he took a commitment from spencer to ship CoD on Sony Cloud? before the judge cut him off?

I think he was asking that, but before Phil could give an answer (or non-answer), the judge cut it off. At least from what I remember.

 

[Vognerful]

His testimony is meaningless as a commitment if he gets overridden or changes his mind. Doesn’t matter what game he’s talking about.

I am not sure this is the specific case, read Ogbert comment earlier.

 

[Yoboman]

Do we have any really bad court drawings of Spencer

 

[NickFire]

I am not sure this is the specific case, read Ogbert comment earlier.

He’s UK lawyer. This is US court.

 

[Vognerful]

I think he was asking that, but before Phil could give an answer (or non-answer), the judge cut it off. At least from what I remember.

I mean it was a weird thing. Why he would promise anything about that when it would fall under Sony's responsibility to stream games through their cloud service?

 

[tryDEATH]

Yea, this didn't go the FTC's way. Phil's evasive skills were simply to slick. The lawyer didn't get the necessary ammo needed to win this case, the rest of the days are basically just a formality at this point.

 

[Pelta88]

Witness from Google?

 

[GHG]

So who said that?

MS' lawyer?

I can't remember who answered it but it definitely wasn't a "yes".

 

[Vognerful]

he is talking too fast for me :/

 

[XesqueVara]

Did the FTC Lawyer really compared third party deals with an Acquisition? Lmao

 

[BoxFresh123]

Do we have any really bad court drawings of Spencer

"Let me tell you about Teraflops"

 

[ChorizoPicozo]

the FTC's lawyers come across very sloppy even if they have what it seems a good line of reasoning....i dont think they making as strong points as they could have.

 

[Yoboman]

Where eyou guys even watching this thing

 

[Ogbert]

His testimony is meaningless as a commitment if he gets overridden or changes his mind. Doesn’t matter what game he’s talking about.

I need to tune back in.

Who is stating this? Is it an assertion by the FTC lawyer, or a question?

As a point of basic law, the idea that the head of Xbox gaming can make a categorical representation to the domestic US regulator, under oath, but that this does not bind the underlying corporate entity is absurd.

Although I hold my hands up. If this doesn't apply in the US, then that legal system is fucking wild.

 

[Varteras]

Where eyou guys even watching this thing

The cloud!

 

[GHG]

then that legal system is fucking wild.

It is.

 

[ChorizoPicozo]

Did the FTC Lawyer really compared third party deals with an Acquisition? Lmao

that was not the point

 

[Gambit2483]

Sarah Bond replacing Phil as soon as this trial and merger happens is the strategy it seems. If you are bound by the rules then flip the board.

Sarah Bond is MS' honey trap....

 

[Larvana]

You know FTC screwed up if the Judge had to intervene TWICE. Even the Judge is fed up of FTC shit.

 

[thicc_girls_are_teh_best]

I mean it was a weird thing. Why he would promise anything about that when it would fall under Sony's responsibility to stream games through their cloud service?

That is technically true, but I think the FTC lawyer meant in terms of Sony qualifying as having access to providing cloud versions of COD games in their service the way various companies have been for the UK market (and I would assume, through automatic free cloud licenses similar to the cloud providers the EC seemingly amended MS's behavioral remedies to include).

Yea, this didn't go the FTC's way. Phil's evasive skills were simply to slick. The lawyer didn't get the necessary ammo needed to win this case, the rest of the days are basically just a formality at this point.

You think this is about a simple "gotcha" when the "gotcha" is about a lot of small lies that get spotted and build up into a snowball. Step up to the 4D chess level, stop playing checkers.

 

[tmlDan]

Did the FTC Lawyer really compared third party deals with an Acquisition? Lmao

No, he was questioning the need for an acquisition that required 70 billion dollars when they could spend a fraction, like Sony, to purchase third party exclusivity.

His claim is that since Sony can do it why can't you? instead you spend a large sum that Phil calls an Investment/compared it to a house mortgage

 

[SlimySnake]

Do we have any really bad court drawings of Spencer

 

[Unknown Soldier]

the FTC's lawyers come across very sloppy even if they have what it seems a good line of reasoning....i dont think they making as strong points as they could have.

The FTC is completely out of their league here. Competent lawyers would have won this case already unfortunately.

Plus the judge's son works for Microsoft, this was probably already in the bag for MS before this show trial even started.

 

[dotnotbot]

You know FTC screwed up if the Judge had to intervene TWICE. Even the Judge is fed up of FTC shit.

Or just the time is limited here you know (and she decided it's best to move on other things). This doesn't work like an average internet discussion.

 

[NickFire]

I need to tune back in.

Who is stating this? Is it an assertion by the FTC lawyer, or a question?

As a point of basic law, the idea that the head of Xbox gaming can make a categorical representation to the domestic US regulator, under oath, but that this does not bind the underlying corporate entity is absurd.

Although I hold my hands up. If this doesn't apply in the US, then that legal system is fucking wild.

He’s testifying to his future plans as he sits in that chair. If plans change and they can prove he lied today there’s possible trouble. If they can’t prove a lie was made then changed plans mean no trouble. That’s just the way it is on this side.

 

[Varteras]

Although I hold my hands up. If this doesn't apply in the US, then that legal system is fucking wild.

The FTC is a regulatory body with no real power, that could be owned by one political party, currently run by a Biden-appointed chair. The case is being presided over by a Biden-appointed judge in a highly Democratic region of the US, whose son works for Microsoft. We get wild over here.

 

[Nydius]

You think this is about a simple "gotcha" when the "gotcha" is about a lot of small lies that get spotted and build up into a snowball. Step up to the 4D chess level, stop playing checkers.

He's the guy I had in mind when I wrote my previous post about "this ain't law & order". He's got it in his head that there has to be a smoking gun and then Jack McCoy gets his conviction. Doesn't work that way in real life, but yet he's still popping in here parroting his same "Phil won! It's over! Acquisition is done!" trash.

 

[Thirty7ven]

Yo this cornball really rocking an Xbox hat and Phil Spencer shirt?

 

[Drell]

Plus the judge's son works for Microsoft, this was probably already in the bag for MS before this show trial even started.

Fuck this shit

 

[Thick Thighs Save Lives]

 

[GHG]

Yo this cornball really rocking an Xbox hat and Phil Spencer shirt?

Yep. This is what we have to deal with.

 

[thicc_girls_are_teh_best]

He's the guy I had in mind when I wrote my previous post about "this ain't law & order". He's got it in his head that there has to be a smoking gun and then Jack McCoy gets his conviction. Doesn't work that way in real life, but yet he's still popping in here parroting his same "Phil won! It's over! Acquisition is done!" trash.

Probably thinks that way due to too many Hollywood movies, TV shows and never being in a real courtroom :/

 

[Vognerful]

Yep. This is what we have to deal with.

you could be the one to save us, but you choose not to.

 

[GHG]

Plus the judge's son works for Microsoft, this was probably already in the bag for MS before this show trial even started.

On this point I don't understand why a new judge wasn't requested on the grounds of conflict of interest?

 

[Thirty7ven]

the FTC's lawyers come across very sloppy even if they have what it seems a good line of reasoning....i dont think they making as strong points as they could have.

They can’t deviate from facts, documentation, public statements and previous testimonies.

The whole makes a point.

 

[FoxMcChief]

On this point I don't understand why a new judge wasn't requested on the grounds of conflict of interest?

Because once you pay for a judge, they have to stay. Plus I think someone lost the receipt.

 

[dotnotbot]

He's the guy I had in mind when I wrote my previous post about "this ain't law & order". He's got it in his head that there has to be a smoking gun and then Jack McCoy gets his conviction. Doesn't work that way in real life, but yet he's still popping in here parroting his same "Phil won! It's over! Acquisition is done!" trash.

98% of posts on Era are like that. They have no clue what's this all about. Already posted some example on how it looks like from an expert perspective who isn't emotinally tied to one or the other side:

 

[Varteras]

On this point I don't understand why a new judge wasn't requested on the grounds of conflict of interest?

THANK YOU! I pointed this out before. Like how is there not an automatic removal of the judge from this case and why would the FTC be okay with that? Unless....