Couldn't have said it better than I would.
-
Ever wanted an RSS feed of all your favorite gaming news sites? Go check out our new Gaming Headlines feed! Read more about it here.
Quantic Dream has been condemned by French Court over still ongoing cases of employees harassments & toxic working conditions
- Thread starter Deleted member 2791
- Start date
Couldn't have said it better than I would.
Pardon my French, but it seems the judge found no bad working conditions on QD's office. The judgment also found that the company reacted accordingly in regards to the issues raised by the plaintiff.
Edit: I should add that my French is really basic and I'm being aided by Google translate, but it seems like a favorable judgment for QD.
Edit2: seems like the complaint about the image editing was also shot down, as the judge found said image didn't hurt the plaintiff's image.
Short translation: Judge dismissed the plaintif's demands of €114000 for being fired. QD will only have to pay him €7000. So yeah...QD didn't really loose.at all..its quite the opposite.
Thread title is effectively misleading...
Thread just got real quite suddenly..
Last edited:
User banned (5 days): Repeatedly and condescendingly defending gross misconduct over a series of posts, ignoring multiple corrections from native French speakers
Plenty of trolls love spreading fake news regarding quantic dreams just because they don't enjoy their games, so this isn't surprising at all.
It's not misleading, and it's not "fake news" either. The judge dismissed the 114k lawsuit, but still found QD culpable and awarded 7k to the plaintiff.
If you read the tryagame.fr article linked in the OP, you see that the judge also called the photoshops "homophobic, misogynistic, racist, and profoundly vulgar", and acknowledged that this was going on for years internally in the QD office. The judge said the employer was at fault for this.
Thing is, the employee resigned due to this, and tried to sue QD so that his resignation would be considered as being unfairly/illegally fired. This is the part the judge rejected and why he wasn't awared the 114k euros.
It does not mean the ruling absolved QD, or that the toxic, homophobic, misogynistic, etc. shit happening there didn't happen, on the contrary; only that the court didn't legally rule QD as being responsible for an illegal firing.
But, of course, QD is spinning this hard as some sort of victory/absolution of wrong doing. Fuck them.
If you read the tryagame.fr article linked in the OP, you see that the judge also called the photoshops "homophobic, misogynistic, racist, and profoundly vulgar", and acknowledged that this was going on for years internally in the QD office. The judge said the employer was at fault for this.
Thing is, the employee resigned due to this, and tried to sue QD so that his resignation would be considered as being unfairly/illegally fired. This is the part the judge rejected and why he wasn't awared the 114k euros.
It does not mean the ruling absolved QD, or that the toxic, homophobic, misogynistic, etc. shit happening there didn't happen, on the contrary; only that the court didn't legally rule QD as being responsible for an illegal firing.
But, of course, QD is spinning this hard as some sort of victory/absolution of wrong doing. Fuck them.
I mean, you are clearly reading this wrongly and I don't understand why. It's clearly stated that the claims regarding workplace abuse/degradation were shot down due to the fact that the photoshopped image did not justify that sort of damage and also due to quantic dreams taking the correct course of action in regards to everything that transpired. The damage claims (which amount to 114.000 euros) were shot down and QD even waived their right to an appeal, so yes, the finding was clearly in their favor.
You're talking down to a native French speaker while you use Google translate.
Incredible.
Bruh, I'm a native French speaker, and yet:
The article I re-linked to is explicitly clear and I've summarized it accurately. Meanwhile you choose to believe QD's damage control PR statement to tell me (and all those articles) who's wrong.
You wanna try that again? As-tu besoin de leçons de français, peut-être? Je suis prête à discuter les détails de l'article si veux. Essaye-toi mon homme.
Je ne vois pas vraiment quels details il y a discuter sachant que le jugement est assez clair. Non ? Que le juge qualifie les photomontage d' " homophobes, misogynes, racistes ou encore profondément vulgaires » est une chose. ..Mais le meme juge a aussi jugé que cela ne rentrait pas en compte dans l'affaire jugé est a débouté le plaignant dans sa demande de requalification de sont depart de l'entreprise et ses €114000 imaginaires.
The question that remains to be discussed, I suppose, is if you want to defend QD and use their PR statement because the court ruling wasn't quite as generous as the employee wanted it to be, while knowing that they
a) still had to pay 7k euros to the guy and considered QD responsible and
b) did have those disgustingly bigoted photoshops being circulated in the workplace (i.e. it's not "fake news", the judge acknowledged that it happened),
Well, to this I would ask you: why? Why would anyone defend this?
I'll have to access the decision/sentence itself then, because I find it very hard to believe that they're being considered as "condemned for toxic conditions" when the plaintiff was not awarded for damages claimed.
Defend ? I'm not defending shit. I actually don't give a shit about this like at all. I've never even played any QD game..This thread is about this particular judgment. The judgement is clear and the PR statement from QD is 100% factual. The 7000€ is a token lump sum which is awarded to cover the cost of the the attorneys and process. Now if you want to make up your own narrative around it then so be it.
It's totally possible to condemn QD while also disagreeing with the plaintiff on the amount they're owed. They're not mutually exclusive and the role of a judge is not to give the winner of the case whatever they want.
It's actually 2000 euros for costs and 5000 euros for a breach of security due to the images having been leaked, but no damages for poor working conditions were awarded.
The plaintiff was not awarded for the damages claimed in regards to poor working conditions or due to the photoshopped image. The decision did not "disagree" on the amount, it disregarded the plaintiff's claim for damages.
Read the whole article talking about the case (native french speaker here)... Yeah Quantic dream is obviously letting lots of details out from this delcaration...like for exemple they said they won't appeal... but in the meantime they're still suing the employe for something else (stealing internal data)
And the same employee is also still suing them for more money in relation to another caricaturale picture of him....looks like you also left out some details..
How is this pertinent to that statement? The plaintiff did not release any statement of events and Kain did not say he wasn't suing over it or made a factual statement... cause the employee gave none.
What are you babbling about ? The plaintiff has filled another similar case against QD in relation to a second picture of him.
Yeah, you said that. I never questioned that.
My statement was about why Kain, needs to make note of that when remarking on Qunatic Dream's PR statement? It's not the Plaintiff's own.
He said that QD left details out (which is true): QD is suing him for data theft. But he literally did exactly the same thing by not mention that the guy has also filled a second suit against QD. (both pieces of info are in the original french report).
He has no obligation to state it, because he's responding to their statement.
He's not reporting on the case, he's pointing out issues in their statement and gave an example.
User Banned (3 Days): Antagonizing Another User; Prior Warning for Similar Behavior
And I'm pointing out an issue in his statement...is that an issue Mister Era Patrol Officer ?
except i said "for exemple", meaning it's just one of many things left out... it's not hard...
And i don't see how it's an issue, first i'm not making a PR statement, i'm just a random dude, and second, i don't see how the employee suing them again is like hiding something? It's pretty negative for QD and i could have added it to make my post even more negative towards them
In the end, the title is misleading as it states that QD was condemned in a case about poor/toxic working conditions due to the edited picture, but their condemnation WAS NOT FOR the conditions/picture, but due to a security breach. So yeah, I maintain it should be altered. If I can read the entirety of the sentence, I'll post some more thoughts on it later.
No one is spreading fake news and it's not really hard to dunk on QD with Cage being who he is so yeah.
There's no "security breach".
"Obligation de sécurité", in French (I'm native, sorry), means that, paraphrasing from the law, the employer needs to take every available mean to ensure the physical and mental security of its employees. The fault is on QD for not doing something about it for years despite being aware of it (as per the judgement).
The title is technically correct, but I agree that the OP should be updated to give more details on the how and why of the judgement, as this is vague and a bit incorrect.
I see. Seems to me then that what was dismissed by the court was the claim regarding "personal damages", so to say. In the end, they're getting something akin to a fine rather than being condemned for employee harassment/toxic working conditions, which would still merit a change in the title, IMO.
Also, I couldn't even access OP's source as it requires a subscription, plus I couldn't access the entire ruling so far.
David Cage: "Judge me by my games"
Guess, it was more of a admission of guilt and not a defense considering the content in his games
Edit: Came for the David Cage blowout, and now I'm seeing native french speakers blow someone up. amazing thread
Guess, it was more of a admission of guilt and not a defense considering the content in his games
Edit: Came for the David Cage blowout, and now I'm seeing native french speakers blow someone up. amazing thread
Last edited:
OP
OP
I shouldn't be surprised but I'm still impressed that people somehow manage to still form a defense force on their fav company despite being a serious human rights issue. I got linked the QD tweet yesterday but couldn't translate it since I was busy until late at night.
Title isn't going to change because you don't want to see Cage's company being rightfully pointed out online. Also, one of the links I gave in OP provided a summary of the ruling.
Thread title is 100% accurate.
What does the ruling say ?
Avis définitif qui n'a finalement été rendu que deux ans après, le 15 octobre 2019, avec une juge qualifiant certains photomontages concernés d'« homophobes, misogynes, racistes ou encore profondément vulgaires », ajoutant que ceux-ci ont été diffusés en interne « pendant plusieurs années […] dans l'entreprise par des salariés, sans que l'employeur, pourtant informé, ne réagisse », et qu'« en restant passif face à cette pratique plus que contestable, qui ne peut se justifier par l'esprit "humoristique" dont se prévaut la société, l'employeur a commis une violation de l'obligation de sécurité ».
"The photomontages were homophobic, sexists, racists and crude".
Those circulated "for many years in the company and were shared by employees, while the employer, despite being in the known, took any action".
"By staying passive to those condemnable behaviour, which cant be justified by "humour" as claimed by the company, the employer violated the obligation of security."
Now, we can discuss legal matters: What law did QD infrige ?
But there's something that has been stated already: The facts. Were there sexist, racist, homophobic photomontages shared among the employees, with the company being in the known, without any actions taken ? Yes. That is an undisputed fact.
Now whatever those facts are an infraction of X or Y law, this is another matter, which the thread title isn't about.
LOL at ''fake news'' being throw around by someone using the google translation of a pr statement. Just incredible.