Hey everyone – CCPLegalGuy here!
As you may know, I’m CCP’s newest staff member, and my job here is to interact with those of you who might have concerns regarding some of our recent policies and decisions, which may or may not have accurately reflected the internal policy of Pearl Abyss.
As we come now to consider our actions of late, we must carefully consider the recent allegations and consequences thereof. Here at CCP, we have always been motivated by our desire for social justice and the advancement of human society as our first and foremost consideration. Unfortunately, we have strayed from that straight and narrow path, drifting into the most base rancor against our fellow man.
When we first made our allegations against Mr. Rubal, we did not fully consider the Hague Conventions of 1938, or the broad implications of New York v. Bilt (1957). Nor did we properly assess our crucial obligation to maintain chain of custody with regard to evidence, or rather alleged evidence, which cannot be discussed as evidence due to the fact that it might prejudice a reasonable observer into drawing an unsubstantiated conclusion.
Initially, CCP assumed that the EULA agreement with Mr. Rubal was fully developed and clearly stated, albeit we did not consider our most basic treaty obligations under the UN General Charter, the San Francisco Charter of 1945, or recent rulings by the International Monetary Fund (1993 and 2006) which explicitly defined the existence and fundamental nature of a contractual arrangement between international partners who have entered into a mutually derived contract “which both bestows and grants liability unto each as upon the other”. For a quick review, you may wish to consider the dissenting opinion of Krugman v. Beiderhagen, Werder, and Kopfermann, 1890, which delineates a common law interpretation of the Sherman Antitrust Act and applies that within the fascinating context of the Erie & Pennsylvania Railroad’s attempt to provide “wormhole” service between Seattle and Vancouver.
One thing we have learned from this experience is that although we cannot say with conviction that Mr. Rubal was innocent of any wrongdoing, we also cannot say say that he was guilty, nor can we even say that we cannot fully ascertain his guilt since that might prime facie suggest a presumption of guilt. In the inordinate sense, we can only conclude that Mr. Rubal will be unbanned, although we would not go so far as to say he should never have been banned, only that we have not fully elucidated the reasoning thereof in accordance with the stipulations of the Landsréttur Reform Act of 1973 and the new oversight authority of the Dómstólasýsla.
I think, as we move forward, the important thing to understand is that New Zealand is also a sovereign entity, and even a humble Icelandic corporation is required to follow the laws of New Zealand when engaging in commercial activities via fiberobtic telecommunications servers, as defined within annex B of Regulation (EC) No 593/2008 and the Lugano Convention which extended the already revolutionary interpretation of Brussels I (2001). Of course, we would be remiss not to consider the full implications of Dow Jones v. Gutnick (2002), in which the Australian High Court ruled that the defendant could be held liable for libel in Australia, even though the Dow website was hosted outside the territorial limits of the plaintiff’s house of residing and boarding.
Therefore, I am pleased to announce that CCP has also conducted a thorough investigation of the reasons which wrongly led to the unsubstantiated banning of Loyalanon, Wolf Soprano, Trump the King, and two hundred and fifty other individuals who might collectively be described as EVE’s #1 PvP champion. Furthermore, I have little choice but to declare James 315 as the sole winner of the 2015 Alliance Tournament. Next week, I will be reviewing the extensive Bonus Room audiotrack collection, and delineating line by line CCP’s obligation to render compensatory action for Erotica 1, D400, and any other victims of the Bonus experience which was technically hosted on CCP’s internal corporate servers.
Finally, let me state that in order to finally once and for all resolve our legal standing with Mr. Rubal, we will be offering him the opportunity to choose either a package consisting of 25,000 skill points and a three day Omega booster pack, or an undisclosed financial settlement.
This makes me wonder if Brisc based his appeal upon the basis of the Berlin Convention of 1878, which dedicated a subannex to the fiduciary obligations of the litigants in an international business dispute.
This was a great read, props for all the great detailed research you’ve made into those applicable rulings and regulations!
Comments are closed.