CDPR to launch 'vigorous' defense against Cyberpunk 2077 class action lawsuit

Endymio

Posts: 1,334   +1,216
There must be a hole in that theory, the suit names (presumably) officers:
No hole: investor suits nearly always name officers as well, under the Sec 20(a) "joint and several" catchall. The fact remains that the vast bulk of any settlement will come out of the corporation's purse, which means other investors, irrefutably innocent of any wrongdoing, will foot the bill.

If CDPR loses and it cost them their arms and legs, that's the price of lying.
You keep attempting to separate "the company" from its owners -- the investors. For purposes of financial settlement, the two are equivalent.

others similarly situated
aka [others] with pertinent knowledge of the events.
No. That's a boilerplate preamble for a class action suit; it allows these attorneys to automatically count as plaintiffs everyone who fits a particular description, unless those individuals specifically opt out of the suit.
 

Gezzer

Posts: 119   +66
1) Looks up the law firm on google. These sleaze bags are the equivalent of ambulance chasers.

2) Unless CDPR fraudulently and maliciously misstated their financial health, good luck with winning the lawsuit. Maliciously intention is notoriously hard to prove in court and requires a preponderance of evidence.

3) Good bet the sleazebag lawyers are shorting the stock. Their intention isn't to win, it's to cause more Fear, Uncertainly, Doubt (FUD). Part of a short attack on the stock.

Finally, someone that understands what's going on. The lawsuit has a 50/50 chance at best because playing the stock market is at best an educated gamble. Stocks gain and lose value constantly (unless it's Apple or Amazon). So the thing that they need to prove is that CDPR knowingly committed fraud in an attempt to hoodwink investors. They will counter this claim stating that their malfeasance was due to damage control where the last gen base consoles were concerned. What can and most likely will happen is who ever made the disastrous decisions will lose their jobs when the next stock holder's meeting is held. Which is actually how things are supposed to work.
 

Gezzer

Posts: 119   +66
The Company launched Cyberpunk 2077 on December 10, 2020. Consumers soon discovered that the Current-Generation Console versions of Cyberpunk 2077 were error-laden and difficult to play.​
IGN published a scathing review, stating that the Console versions “fail to hit even the lowest bar of technical quality one should expect even when playing on lower-end hardware." [Cyberpunk 2077] "performs so poorly that it makes combat, driving, and what is otherwise a master craft of storytelling legitimately difficult to look at.”​

Burn! The lawsuit is a dramatic piece of work.



It will be if it's found to be frivolous.



They also know when a company LIES to them about performance they have legal recourse.

In regard to your last point. They have to prove that any lies (fraud) were meant to trick investors and not end users. And that's the sticky point that the lawsuit will fail on. Fact is where stock prices are concerned IMHO either action, releasing or not releasing the last gen base version would of resulted in a drop in stock value. Stock value is based on investor confidence in a companies future performance. The difference here is the lawyers are using all the outrage over the release as an attempt to sway the court in their favour. So you have to ask yourself will it work? 50/50 chance at best IMHO.
 

Endymio

Posts: 1,334   +1,216
They have to prove that any lies (fraud) were meant to trick investors and not end users.
No. That's not how the law works. They need simply demonstrate intentional fraud; there is no "intended target audience" qualifier to the Exchange Act statute.
 

Gezzer

Posts: 119   +66
No. That's not how the law works. They need simply demonstrate intentional fraud; there is no "intended target audience" qualifier to the Exchange Act statute.

For their lawsuit they DO have to prove that it wasn't damage control and was intentionally meant to defraud investors. That's what it will hinge and eventually fail on.
 
For me it should have been said right at the start will only run on pc and next gen console I play on series x and have had minimal bugs. Also should have released next year and that would have solved a lot of the bugs too and let's not send any more death threats to those who provide us with our games.
 

Endymio

Posts: 1,334   +1,216
For their lawsuit they DO have to prove that it wasn't damage control and was intentionally meant to defraud investors.
Again, no. Read the statute. Exchange Act § 240.10b-5, specifically, which is what the suit is alleging. To be more precise, fraud is a component, but not a necessary component.
 
Last edited:

Reehahs

Posts: 1,164   +797
There must be a hole in that theory, the suit names (presumably) officers:

ANDREW TRAMPE, Individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated, Plaintiff, v. CD PROJEKT S.A., ADAM MICHAL KICINSKI, PIOTR MARCIN NIELUBOWICZ, and MICHAŁ NOWAKOWSKI, Defendants.​
I don't expect a particular result from a court, if it progress' that far. If CDPR loses and it cost them their arms and legs, that's the price of lying.

Protecting a scam is a wholly different mindset.
aka [others] with pertinent knowledge of the events. The lawsuit is self-terminating.

I do not hold any grudge to CDPR, I rather see them turn out a quality product, but they've failed at that, naming "complexities". They just didn't finish the game!

Since their "investors" are suing and others feel aggrieved, commenting along the lines of "CDPR deserve a bit of punishment " all over the net, something beside chants of vengeance need to take place.

What is CDPR's problem with refunding; beside "don't want to"?

I don't know, certain scams keep on giving like Star Citizen.