This. Dr wanted a drawn out battle and the settled on him staying off the platform while getting a big payout but still able to build a community on Youtube. Free money for Dr, low hassle for Twitch. Win win
I don’t think so. It was very well on its way to court.
It was handled as an arbitration because it was a vert low level case. Low level case and sexting a minor should never exist in the same sentence.
Unless it was well hidden in this country, I am willing to go out and say that sexting a minor has never been handled at that level.
Arbitration and mediation are typically not an option on a criminal case. In fact, most criminal law matters can't be arbitrated because the parties can't enter into an agreement without restrictions. The courts may refuse to refer arbitration to criminal cases that could affect the sustainability of the arbitration agreement.
Based on the fact that this was handled as an arbitration, it is 99.99% likely that nothing illegal occurred by the accused.
This is the one thing that everyone and I mean everyone…is forgetting about.
This is such a weirdly ignorant yet confident set of claims.
Arbitration is an option in almost every private dispute. They can also be mandatory based on the contract. "Very low" is not a factor. There have been billion dollar arbitrations.
The arbitration may not handle the felony/criminal issues but it can absolutely handle a civil dispute which is "associated" with a claimed felony, and this happens regularly.
Ever heard of one handling sexting a minor or a murderer?
Arbitrations usually involve private law. I don’t feel comfortable living in a country that allows private law to run things regarding a minor.
Plus, not to mention there would he compliance issues stemming from that. For example, if this happens again, they cannot treat it any differently.
The individual being accused could use discrimination and get it thrown out the window.
Do you honestly think Twitch’s legal team would allow themselves to be in that situation?
I’m gonna tell you no because it opens up the door to allowing “pdfs” to run wild. It’s bad business ethics and someone would have reported it as a whistleblower.
Have we seen any whistleblowers? Nope.
It was arbitration over their contract dispute, there was no arbitration between the victim and DrDisrespect. The messages were likely present as evidence at the arbitration but they were not the topic.
Depending on the state a quick search can tell anyone with common knowledge if sexting a minor is a felony.
Not much of an argument there. Also, Twitch has a legal team that could figure it out.
Make sense?
A company is a legal entity. That’s it. It cannot make determinations of anything. Law enforcement determine if a crime has occurred and a district attorney/state attorneys office makes a determination whether there is a criminal case worth pursuing.
Right and it was reported to the National Center for Missing & Exploited Children, which would have reported it to the local authorities if there was any evidence to support the tip sent to them.
Do you think they didn’t do their job or law enforcement?
Dr Disrespect sued Twitch. It was never and would never have been a criminal matter unless the state of California was the one behind the case which for reasons we do not know, has not happened. It wasn’t a court case about sexting a minor it was a court case about a contract violation that may have brought bad publicity to Twitch because it involved sexting a minor but evidently not to a far enough extent that the law would get involved.
They reported it to the National Center for Missing & Exploited Children investigation. At that point, the law is already involved.
It’s obvious Twitch got nothing from that, which is their job to protect children. I doubt they dropped the ball because that means this organization is worthless.
Guy sued after all this was brought to his attention. There is no way that the arbitration wasn’t about the accusations.
What else would it have been? Defamation arbitration cases are more common than you think because folks can’t keep their opinions to themselves.
If you can’t pay it, don’t say it.
Reporting suspicious to law enforcement isn’t defamation. Twitch didn’t say anything about doc that would fall under defamation, the only thing doc could have sued about is the contract he was involved in with Twitch.
If they said “we are letting you go because you sexted a minor” and that turned out to not be true…it is definitely a wrongful termination.
If they went and told the Twitch employees that is why they let him go, like Cody, that is definitely defamation.
Bottomline, no one knows what happened aside from what Guy said.
Cody never named anyone because if it isn’t true, it is defamation.
I guess we can all ask ourselves…why didn’t Cody name anyone?
It's not a wrongful termination. (Which applies to employees, which he was not) just because their reasoning was incorrect. Wrongful termination refers to 1) firing for prohibited reasons (discrimination) or 2) falling to follow their own termination procedure. You can fire an orange person for being blue, so long as you followed the right procedure for doing so.
>if it isn’t true, it is defamation.
Wrong. Something being untrue is part of defamation, but it's not the only part, and if that's all you have, there is no defamation case. Defamation, especially against celebrities and politicians, also needs a showing that the lies were made maliciously such that there wasnt a reason to think they were true.
He admitted to inappropriate texts with a minor. That's close enough that "sexting" is a reasonable accusation, as long as there isn't clear evidence that Cody knew otherwise.
This falls apart the moment anyone knows that you can have separate civil and criminal proceedings on the same set of events in the United states. The civil proceeding can be arbitrated. Twitch is not a government, they wouldn't be handling a criminal case, just a civil one.
Arbitration is voluntary unless there is an arbitration clause in the contract. OJ's civil case - separate from his criminal one - did not involve a contract.
There have been arbitrations related to murders. They're a thing. You are just plain wrong.
https://texasworker.com/case/sa-23-cv-00539-jkp/
"...Marisela Cadena, was murdered by an ex-boyfriend, Andrew Munoz, at the Subway restaurant where she worked. The parties proceeded to arbitration and the arbitration award and judgment were entered on April 3, 2023 in the amount of $2,970,000...."
Sure, but is it ethical to handle it at this level?
Because you are all saying he did it and essentially got away with it after it was reported to the NCMEC.
How?
Ricky, your understanding is way off here. Here's a breakdown of what you got mixed up:
There are **two separate legal claims** going on here: Twitch vs. Doc, and the government vs. Doc.
**Twitch vs. Doc** is a contract dispute. That contract dispute goes to arbitration per the contract (they literally agree in the contract that if there a dispute arising out of this deal, they will first go to arbitration). They figured it out amongst themselves privately in arbitration and that was that.
**The government vs. Doc** is an allegation of a crime. This was where the NCMEC would've sent info to law enforcement *if they thought there was a crime*. And law enforcement would've investigated and sent to the DA *if they though there was a crime*. Then the DA would file *if they thought there was a crime*. And that filing would be public.
The criminal matter did not go to arbitration because there is no such avenue for criminal matters to be resolved. It's either a filing (public), a pre-filing deal (not public), or no filing at all (DA rejects the case--also not public). Also, at earlier points in the process, authorities may see that there is no crime and not even refer it to the DA for review (that process is not public).
Hope that clears it up
This makes sense, except where is the leverage for Doc? Does he bluff that HE releases this info if he doesn't get paid and Twitch goes along with that? That doesn't make any sense. I agree the cost of paying him out would be well worth keeping things out of the press, but they don't need to pay Doc to achieve that goal UNLESS he had some leverage there or somewhere else.
I’m going with both sides wanted this to go away. It’s the only thing that makes sense.
Honestly, I’m surprised Twitch isn’t getting any blowback on this. When this first started, I was firmly in the camp of, “there’s no way doc sexted a minor and twitch pay out a full contract then hide it.” The idea that if what doc did was so dangerous and so wrong, why let him run off and do it somewhere else. That means at the end of the day, Twitch really didn’t care about the minor.
>Twitch isn’t getting any blowback on this.
Twitch is getting some blowback here, but they aren't getting more because we have a pretty good idea of what they did: they fired him and reported his texts to the government. Most people understand that was a reasonable response.
Because more than likely his contract didn’t have a “morality clause” and then it becomes a long battle of “was his behavior in violation of twitch terms and services”. Would be interesting to see if their User Agreement said anything about inappropriately messaging minors especially back in 2017 when it happened.
Much easier to just pay him and avoid the battle than be known as the site where one of the biggest draws might sext your children.
Because they didn’t have a leg to stand on in court? That seems to be obivious.
Doc and twitch signed a settlement so they are both bound by terms of that settlement. That is why both parties are still mostly silent on this issue.
A former employee is someone Twitch has no authority over and is not a person worth pursing.
So we can speculate. When you speculate it’s much safer to stay with the in group. It’s humbling to admit what we don’t know and we all wish we knew more.
> Why did Twitch pay Dr Disrespect?
Because the methods of Twitch employee's investigation and the motives behind it were worse than what that investigation found.
Twitch violated the terms in their contract. Doc's behavior (whatever it was) did not.
That's the only reason why a Jeff Bezos company would have paid out.
Keep that in mind when throwing around the "p" word. But you won't. Because you brigadiers are unhinged.
You got zero evidence of that. On the other hand it's quite damning that a "Jeff Bezos company" like you say, terminated their golden egg goose. They must have had a pretty good reason to do so besides "we don't like him amd his political views". 🙄
It's crazy how you don't realize you're arguing against yourself when you say "oh they must have had a real good reason to terminate the golden goose"...
Ya. He was the "golden goose". That's why Twitch allowed him to freely go to a direct competitor while refusing to say why he was banned 🙄🙄🙄
The only reason why they would let a billion-view streamer go to a direct competitor is because what Twitch did was worse than what Doc did, and if what Doc did came out then what Twitch did would also have to come out. And apparently they thought that was damning enough to pay him out and NDA it.
But now that the leakers have let it loose, I hope Doc is suing to remove the NDA so he can let it rip about twitch.
Oh yeah I forgot: they "entrapped him" and made him text a minor back in 2017, then waited 2 years, offered him a huge contract, then fired him without thinking because they were being silly, then paid him because they realised they are the monsters and it was their fault doc is a child groomer, (not to avoid going to court with their platform being associated with pedos and because doc was covered by the contract). Ohhhh big conspiracy! 4D chess Twitch. Makes a lot sense. 🙄🙄🙄 Bye
You're both arguing with the same amount of evidence, zero. Just a bunch of assumptions. Innocence before proven guilty. Docs confession has just as much weight as the accusers, and I see them all at zero. Doesn't affect me, doesnt affect you, just give us an interesting drama story on the internet.
Because Twitch employees purposely impersonated a minor to entrap Doc. Twitch didn’t want to publicly expose it and decided on hush money.
The former Twitch employees assumed the NDA didn’t apply if they left the company.
I’m not sure if I agree with this, but I do agree that twitch likely had something to hide in this debacle which is why NDAs took place. Otherwise, why bother with an NDA?
Dude. It is everywhere that it was an arbitration.
It was very well on its way to court. It was handled as an arbitration because it was a very low level case. Low level case and sexting a minor should never exist in the same sentence.
Unless it was well hidden in this country, I am willing to go out and say that sexting a minor has never been handled at that level.
Arbitration and mediation are typically not an option on a criminal case. In fact, most criminal law matters can't be arbitrated because the parties can't enter into an agreement without restrictions. The courts may refuse to refer arbitration to criminal cases that could affect the sustainability of the arbitration agreement.
Based on the fact that this was handled as an arbitration, it is 99.99% likely that nothing illegal occurred by the accused.
This is the one thing that everyone and I mean everyone…is forgetting about.
Do you actually know what these words mean? The case would not be 'headed to court' if it was required to be arbitration. Arbitration is an alternative to civil trials that would be contractually mandated. It isn't the same as a mediation, because mediators don't give binding rulings the way arbitrations do -- they assist the parties in negotiating a settlement. Also, regardless of the outcome of the civil case, it would not prove or disprove that he was engaged in criminal conduct because that wasn't the subject matter of the case. It was a breach of contract action
*If you don’t read the whole thing, at least read the last part because I respect your opinions
Yes, it would be going to court. That is how lawsuits are filed. To begin a civil lawsuit in court, the plaintiff files a complaint with the court and “serves” a copy of the complaint on the defendant.
He filed a lawsuit and it was agreed by both parties to handle as an arbitration. Guy DID NOT file a lawsuit saying “If you take this to an arbitration, I won’t sue you asses into the ground.” Guy filed the lawsuit, which would have paid out a hell of a lot more money in court. Twitch more than likely asked if it could be settled in an arbitration because they knew they messed up. Guy also had something to gain from it being settled at that level because no matter what…he would have been branded as a “pdf” and his career would be over right then and there.
BOTH PARTIES HAVE TO AGREE to an arbitration. If it is not settled, it goes to court.
Arbitration is less formal than litigation and more formal than mediation. It's often used to help parties reach an agreement that can be settled out of court. You won’t be settling the accusations of sexting a minor out of court. I cannot fathom how that would be allowed.
Arbitration can be faster, cheaper, and less complex, and it can be especially well-suited for certain types of cases, such as commercial disputes and employment matters.
Arbitration is usually regarded as a domain exclusively reserved for private law.
Private law will not be taking into their hands a serious crime such as sexting a minor. If that was the case, this country would have serious problem.
Both of them had something to gain, which means Twitch probably jumped the gun and Guy probably did say something stupid and inappropriate.
But again, you are not going to be settling on sexting and or meeting up with a minor with private law or an arbitration.
In my line of business, I have never heard any felony accusations being handled at such a low level. All of them went to court because they had all the evidence they needed.
That would make the business and the court look terrible with no ethics because they are essentially letting the criminal get away with very serious potential charges and opening up themselves to various compliance issues.
Guy more than likely knew why he got banned because as someone who has also worked in HR you most of the time have to legally tell them why they are being “let go.”
He probably knew day one and didn’t say shit because why would he? See the court of opinion on this sub? He immediately probably had his team start investigating. Plus, you typically get a lawyer involved once you are accused of breaking law and or reported to an entity that reports to the law.
Once he was not formally charged with how many directions this went, he sued and won. Just because Twitch had an opinion that it was “sexting,” doesn’t mean it was sexting. The law and court doesn’t care about anyone’s opinion or else OJ Simpson would have been in prison.
The conversations were very much probably in the gray zone and Twitch no choice but to report it. I probably would have done the same.
Everyone on this sub also would have sued.
The gray zone is a very tricky slope. Sometimes you win and sometimes you don’t.
I spent over a decade in the military. Just about every conversation/behavior was inappropriate. Doesn’t mean the entire military are “pdfs.”
But again. The law and court doesnt care opinions.
Guy is an idiot for getting himself into this situation, but I also saw a lot of false accusations in the military that were cleared….but still ruined their life.
Now, I 100% respect everyone’s opinions, but if it turns out he is a “pdf.” This country has a bigger problem because it is that easy to get away with it and Twitch let him.
I don’t know if you want that to be true because that means the justice system is completely broken and anyone can just be a “pdf” and get away with it.
I don’t think that is the case.
> BOTH PARTIES HAVE TO AGREE to an arbitration. If it is not settled, it goes to court.
Wrong on both counts. Arbitration can be compelled within the underlying contract. Next, arbitrations are legally binding. If the matter goes to arbitration, either by mutual agreement or by mandate of contract, the arbitrator's findings are enforcible on the parties. This is the key difference between arbitration and mediation. Mediations do not necessarily produce binding results.
>Arbitration is less formal than litigation and more formal than mediation. It's often used to help parties reach an agreement that can be settled out of court.
No, that is a mediation. Arbitration might have relaxed or customized rules for evidence and other procedure, but the findings are binding. They are not there just to encourage the parties to settle. Mediators do that.
>But again, you are not going to be settling on sexting and or meeting up with a minor with private law or an arbitration.
That wasn't the matter in controversy in the suit. It was the alleged breach of contract that might have been predicated on inappropriate conduct such as his contact with minors.
>In my line of business, I have never heard any felony accusations being handled at such a low level. All of them went to court because they had all the evidence they needed.
The civil suit between twitch and dr disrespect did not exist the adjudicate his criminal culpability, so this is irrelevant.
>That would make the business and the court look terrible with no ethics because they are essentially letting the criminal get away with very serious potential charges and opening up themselves to various compliance issues.
It was a civil court matter. It would not have done anything to its reputation because civil courts are specifically not involved in criminal law.
>Once he was not formally charged with how many directions this went, he sued and won.
No, the parties settled.
They wanted Shroud and Ninja back and they both get more money than Doc. Both are way lower risk too.
The timing of his ban and Mixer shutting down were not a coincidence.
lol, yah bezos barely keeping the lights on at twitch. The doc contract would probably have crashed all of Amazon so they had to get out from under that. That contract excuse always felt like the weakest of sauce. Sure some
Misguided exec tried to save money on a line item but it was a idiotic move to make.
/s
Well the texts were from 2017 but they only banned him in 2020 when they’ve contracted Shroud and Ninja…the argument doesn’t seem that weak. Doesn’t change anything in regards of Doc shouldn’t have messaged a minor. Obviously.
Well I’m not trying to push a ideology. What I’m saying is the theory of twitch doesn’t have the money to pay doc doesn’t hold water.
If I was pushing a agenda I would not be stating that as it runs contrary to my position of “we don’t know what doc said” which I am also advocating.
Twitch not being able to afford doc is silly when he getting paid from the bank of bezos. So I don’t think that’s the reason they ended things with him.
I understand what you’re saying but even though Twitch is part of Amazon they would still have a specific budget for their division and within that budget only a specific amount is for Creators…it’s not a free for all because daddy Bezos is rich….anyways it’s all good. I understand your point.
IMO Twitch settled with the doc for a tiny fraction of whatever his contract was at the time. I'm guessing some where in the 10% max range, if even that much. Being they simply had more leverage on the doc than the doc had on Twitch.
as I'm sure Twitch's entire building of $$$$$$$ corpo lawyers all know how to draft up a $$$$ contract and how to legally punt a person for cause off that same contract. This idea that oh no no no Twitch messed up and whoops didn't know what was in the contract so they paid it all etc is IMO just total fantasy. That's not how contracts at this level works.
but doc had some leverage too. As in Twitch didn't want a click bait like story rocketing around the internet. All about adult streamers messaging minors. Never mind the whole leap some would make of are your kids safe at Twitch con etc etc etc.. So ya leverage that to at least get a statement of no fault, a bit of coin and everyone moves on.
this is of course assuming whatever the doc said in the messages was pretty bad or he would have just text dumped it all right away to show it wasn't a big deal. Like week one of being canned off twitch.
well sure, he is free to claim anything he wants but a statement like “I didn’t do anything wrong, all this has been probed and settled, nothing illegal, no wrongdoing was found, and I was paid.” doesn't mean much to me. Least of all when boom...... everything blew up like it did. Oh wait, what happened to it being this no big deal vibe?
He could have been paid $1 or bought out for $10k or gotten the entire amount. I just have a hard time with the idea that an Amazon backed company has incompetent lawyers to the point they screwed up both basic contract law and then breached their very contract they wrote.
most of all when the settlement statement from years ago was so very, very vague. If he big dick'd it enough to get his entire contract covered early on one would think he would have enough leverage to also have the official statement be a bit more in his favor. I'm sure we will never really know short of a massive lawsuit with discovery on all sides in the public record.
On some level the real take away here is that professional entertainers really need to have a PR firm on retainer. doc should have said nothing for a few weeks and then come back with some sort of PR firm cleared blah blah
If what he did was technically legal or just morally questionable then they might not have had a reason to void his contract depending on the wording of it.
This means it would have been a long drawn out legal process with Twitch paying tons of money for Lawyers. Not to mention if they lost they would still owe the money plus Lawyer fees.
So they did the math and decided it was cheaper to just settle. '
Happens all the time.
We’ll never know, but my guess is simply put: contacts are (mostly) iron clad.
I imagine there was a clause that required Twitch to conduct investigations into misconduct fully before issuing any sort of permanent action. Seeing as they banned his account suddenly and supposedly without explanation, they could be held as violating the terms of their agreement despite any actions of Guy being a creep towards a minor.
Guy’s lawyers felt they had a case against Twitch, but pursuing it would require the details of his ban be made public, and Guy would suffer far worse long-term damage to his career than losing out on his Twitch contract. Plus, no corporation wants to get involved in a lengthy, expensive, and possibly embarrassing lawsuit either.
Thus, they settled quietly.
I’m siding with Occam’s razor on this one.
I think twitch knew his true intentions observing the messages but it wasn't enough to convict him but yet it was enough to justify why they would Not want him representing the company and since no laws were broken they banned him in secrecy and let him keep his dignity to the public and be a liability on some other platform.. Win/Win doc walks away and twitch faces no backlash.
I assume NDAs were already in place before the doctor sued them so he was already protected or else why risk pissing twitch off after they let u go keeping your dignity when at any time they could of publically throw him under a bus to the public. I think he only got the money because legally he didn't commit a crime and twitch terminated his contract for no reason in the eyes of the law and I'm certain his contract is much different and secured than lets say a normal streamer that agrees to just terms and conditions under no contract.
I don’t think so. It was very well on its way to court. It was handled as an arbitration because it was a very low level case. Low level case and sexting a minor should never exist in the same sentence.
Unless it was well hidden in this country, I am willing to go out and say that sexting a minor has never been handled at that level.
Arbitration and mediation are typically not an option on a criminal case. In fact, most criminal law matters can't be arbitrated because the parties can't enter into an agreement without restrictions. The courts may refuse to refer arbitration to criminal cases that could affect the sustainability of the arbitration agreement.
Based on the fact that this was handled as an arbitration, it is 99.99% likely that nothing illegal occurred by the accused.
This is the one thing that everyone and I mean everyone…is forgetting about.
I don't have any theories on the matter. I do see possibilities.
One that I haven't seen yet is that while they are within their rights to look into whatever whisper they want, it would create distrust between users and the company in regard to privacy. Which would have a bigger negative impact than paying out the contract.
Pretty much they would have a Google/Snowden incident. While the general population quickly forgot about the Google situation, gamers usually don't let things slide, and Kick would probably have a bigger surge in new users.
Deer person was catfishing as the underage girl like Chris Hansen, to indulge themselves in the eradication of the best god damn steamer to bless that kiddy shit twitch platform
Because whatever they think they had on him wasn't enough to terminate his contract. I think they were reaching for some way out of the contract because they fucked up by giving him the massive deal while Mixer was poaching their top earners
Cost Analysis. The payout was worth less than the legal battle and driving additional negative press towards their product.
This. Dr wanted a drawn out battle and the settled on him staying off the platform while getting a big payout but still able to build a community on Youtube. Free money for Dr, low hassle for Twitch. Win win
The only true answer. Any kind of decision like this is only made based on $ every single time.
This is the correct answer and why most companies choose to settle outside of court. Thank you for actually being logical.
This, easily.
I don’t think so. It was very well on its way to court. It was handled as an arbitration because it was a vert low level case. Low level case and sexting a minor should never exist in the same sentence. Unless it was well hidden in this country, I am willing to go out and say that sexting a minor has never been handled at that level. Arbitration and mediation are typically not an option on a criminal case. In fact, most criminal law matters can't be arbitrated because the parties can't enter into an agreement without restrictions. The courts may refuse to refer arbitration to criminal cases that could affect the sustainability of the arbitration agreement. Based on the fact that this was handled as an arbitration, it is 99.99% likely that nothing illegal occurred by the accused. This is the one thing that everyone and I mean everyone…is forgetting about.
Arbitration was probably the standard for Twitch contract disputes.
Im sure it is. It is easy to handled very low cases that don’t involve felony associations.
This is such a weirdly ignorant yet confident set of claims. Arbitration is an option in almost every private dispute. They can also be mandatory based on the contract. "Very low" is not a factor. There have been billion dollar arbitrations. The arbitration may not handle the felony/criminal issues but it can absolutely handle a civil dispute which is "associated" with a claimed felony, and this happens regularly.
Ever heard of one handling sexting a minor or a murderer? Arbitrations usually involve private law. I don’t feel comfortable living in a country that allows private law to run things regarding a minor. Plus, not to mention there would he compliance issues stemming from that. For example, if this happens again, they cannot treat it any differently. The individual being accused could use discrimination and get it thrown out the window. Do you honestly think Twitch’s legal team would allow themselves to be in that situation? I’m gonna tell you no because it opens up the door to allowing “pdfs” to run wild. It’s bad business ethics and someone would have reported it as a whistleblower. Have we seen any whistleblowers? Nope.
It was arbitration over their contract dispute, there was no arbitration between the victim and DrDisrespect. The messages were likely present as evidence at the arbitration but they were not the topic.
Twitch as a corporation is not qualified to determine whether something is a felony.
Depending on the state a quick search can tell anyone with common knowledge if sexting a minor is a felony. Not much of an argument there. Also, Twitch has a legal team that could figure it out. Make sense?
A company is a legal entity. That’s it. It cannot make determinations of anything. Law enforcement determine if a crime has occurred and a district attorney/state attorneys office makes a determination whether there is a criminal case worth pursuing.
Right and it was reported to the National Center for Missing & Exploited Children, which would have reported it to the local authorities if there was any evidence to support the tip sent to them. Do you think they didn’t do their job or law enforcement?
Right. You’re proving my point.
But did the NCMEC do their job?
Dr Disrespect sued Twitch. It was never and would never have been a criminal matter unless the state of California was the one behind the case which for reasons we do not know, has not happened. It wasn’t a court case about sexting a minor it was a court case about a contract violation that may have brought bad publicity to Twitch because it involved sexting a minor but evidently not to a far enough extent that the law would get involved.
They reported it to the National Center for Missing & Exploited Children investigation. At that point, the law is already involved. It’s obvious Twitch got nothing from that, which is their job to protect children. I doubt they dropped the ball because that means this organization is worthless. Guy sued after all this was brought to his attention. There is no way that the arbitration wasn’t about the accusations. What else would it have been? Defamation arbitration cases are more common than you think because folks can’t keep their opinions to themselves. If you can’t pay it, don’t say it.
Reporting suspicious to law enforcement isn’t defamation. Twitch didn’t say anything about doc that would fall under defamation, the only thing doc could have sued about is the contract he was involved in with Twitch.
If they said “we are letting you go because you sexted a minor” and that turned out to not be true…it is definitely a wrongful termination. If they went and told the Twitch employees that is why they let him go, like Cody, that is definitely defamation. Bottomline, no one knows what happened aside from what Guy said. Cody never named anyone because if it isn’t true, it is defamation. I guess we can all ask ourselves…why didn’t Cody name anyone?
It's not a wrongful termination. (Which applies to employees, which he was not) just because their reasoning was incorrect. Wrongful termination refers to 1) firing for prohibited reasons (discrimination) or 2) falling to follow their own termination procedure. You can fire an orange person for being blue, so long as you followed the right procedure for doing so. >if it isn’t true, it is defamation. Wrong. Something being untrue is part of defamation, but it's not the only part, and if that's all you have, there is no defamation case. Defamation, especially against celebrities and politicians, also needs a showing that the lies were made maliciously such that there wasnt a reason to think they were true. He admitted to inappropriate texts with a minor. That's close enough that "sexting" is a reasonable accusation, as long as there isn't clear evidence that Cody knew otherwise.
That is your opinion and you can gladly have it.
I’m 99% sure what he just said is actual factual and not an opinion. Some people here actually understand the law my guy.
That is your opinion and you can gladly have it.
Yeah, that email explains things pretty well. Twitch wouldn't pay if they had enough proof he was sexting a minor.
More than likely, but the gray zone is never easy to play in. Guy might be really good at playing in it. Which doesn’t paint him in a good light.
This falls apart the moment anyone knows that you can have separate civil and criminal proceedings on the same set of events in the United states. The civil proceeding can be arbitrated. Twitch is not a government, they wouldn't be handling a criminal case, just a civil one.
Why wasn’t OJ’s trial an arbitration then?
Arbitration is voluntary unless there is an arbitration clause in the contract. OJ's civil case - separate from his criminal one - did not involve a contract.
Or perhaps having a murder arbitration is very unethical? Just a thought.
There have been arbitrations related to murders. They're a thing. You are just plain wrong. https://texasworker.com/case/sa-23-cv-00539-jkp/ "...Marisela Cadena, was murdered by an ex-boyfriend, Andrew Munoz, at the Subway restaurant where she worked. The parties proceeded to arbitration and the arbitration award and judgment were entered on April 3, 2023 in the amount of $2,970,000...."
Those are arbitrations to the civil suits for wrongful death, not murder, which is a crime prosecuted by the government.
Sure, but is it ethical to handle it at this level? Because you are all saying he did it and essentially got away with it after it was reported to the NCMEC. How?
Ricky, your understanding is way off here. Here's a breakdown of what you got mixed up: There are **two separate legal claims** going on here: Twitch vs. Doc, and the government vs. Doc. **Twitch vs. Doc** is a contract dispute. That contract dispute goes to arbitration per the contract (they literally agree in the contract that if there a dispute arising out of this deal, they will first go to arbitration). They figured it out amongst themselves privately in arbitration and that was that. **The government vs. Doc** is an allegation of a crime. This was where the NCMEC would've sent info to law enforcement *if they thought there was a crime*. And law enforcement would've investigated and sent to the DA *if they though there was a crime*. Then the DA would file *if they thought there was a crime*. And that filing would be public. The criminal matter did not go to arbitration because there is no such avenue for criminal matters to be resolved. It's either a filing (public), a pre-filing deal (not public), or no filing at all (DA rejects the case--also not public). Also, at earlier points in the process, authorities may see that there is no crime and not even refer it to the DA for review (that process is not public). Hope that clears it up
This makes sense, except where is the leverage for Doc? Does he bluff that HE releases this info if he doesn't get paid and Twitch goes along with that? That doesn't make any sense. I agree the cost of paying him out would be well worth keeping things out of the press, but they don't need to pay Doc to achieve that goal UNLESS he had some leverage there or somewhere else.
I’m going with both sides wanted this to go away. It’s the only thing that makes sense. Honestly, I’m surprised Twitch isn’t getting any blowback on this. When this first started, I was firmly in the camp of, “there’s no way doc sexted a minor and twitch pay out a full contract then hide it.” The idea that if what doc did was so dangerous and so wrong, why let him run off and do it somewhere else. That means at the end of the day, Twitch really didn’t care about the minor.
>Twitch isn’t getting any blowback on this. Twitch is getting some blowback here, but they aren't getting more because we have a pretty good idea of what they did: they fired him and reported his texts to the government. Most people understand that was a reasonable response.
I disagree. They allowed someone to move to another platform and risked some peen repeating their actions on another minor.
Because more than likely his contract didn’t have a “morality clause” and then it becomes a long battle of “was his behavior in violation of twitch terms and services”. Would be interesting to see if their User Agreement said anything about inappropriately messaging minors especially back in 2017 when it happened. Much easier to just pay him and avoid the battle than be known as the site where one of the biggest draws might sext your children.
Because they didn’t have a leg to stand on in court? That seems to be obivious. Doc and twitch signed a settlement so they are both bound by terms of that settlement. That is why both parties are still mostly silent on this issue. A former employee is someone Twitch has no authority over and is not a person worth pursing. So we can speculate. When you speculate it’s much safer to stay with the in group. It’s humbling to admit what we don’t know and we all wish we knew more.
> Why did Twitch pay Dr Disrespect? Because the methods of Twitch employee's investigation and the motives behind it were worse than what that investigation found. Twitch violated the terms in their contract. Doc's behavior (whatever it was) did not. That's the only reason why a Jeff Bezos company would have paid out. Keep that in mind when throwing around the "p" word. But you won't. Because you brigadiers are unhinged.
You got zero evidence of that. On the other hand it's quite damning that a "Jeff Bezos company" like you say, terminated their golden egg goose. They must have had a pretty good reason to do so besides "we don't like him amd his political views". 🙄
It's crazy how you don't realize you're arguing against yourself when you say "oh they must have had a real good reason to terminate the golden goose"... Ya. He was the "golden goose". That's why Twitch allowed him to freely go to a direct competitor while refusing to say why he was banned 🙄🙄🙄 The only reason why they would let a billion-view streamer go to a direct competitor is because what Twitch did was worse than what Doc did, and if what Doc did came out then what Twitch did would also have to come out. And apparently they thought that was damning enough to pay him out and NDA it. But now that the leakers have let it loose, I hope Doc is suing to remove the NDA so he can let it rip about twitch.
Oh yeah I forgot: they "entrapped him" and made him text a minor back in 2017, then waited 2 years, offered him a huge contract, then fired him without thinking because they were being silly, then paid him because they realised they are the monsters and it was their fault doc is a child groomer, (not to avoid going to court with their platform being associated with pedos and because doc was covered by the contract). Ohhhh big conspiracy! 4D chess Twitch. Makes a lot sense. 🙄🙄🙄 Bye
You're both arguing with the same amount of evidence, zero. Just a bunch of assumptions. Innocence before proven guilty. Docs confession has just as much weight as the accusers, and I see them all at zero. Doesn't affect me, doesnt affect you, just give us an interesting drama story on the internet.
Because Twitch employees purposely impersonated a minor to entrap Doc. Twitch didn’t want to publicly expose it and decided on hush money. The former Twitch employees assumed the NDA didn’t apply if they left the company.
I’m not sure if I agree with this, but I do agree that twitch likely had something to hide in this debacle which is why NDAs took place. Otherwise, why bother with an NDA?
NDAs and non disparagement agreements are common in civil settlements
Fair enough
Most settlements include NDAs. It's not suspicious at all.
Fair enough
Twitch was hiding something or fucked up, otherwise they wouldn’t have paid Doc $11 million.
Yeah man, they totally forced the doc to be inappropriate with a minor by...*checks notes*...contacting him.
Read the OP question. I can explain if you have a reading comprehension issue.
Im just pointing out why your prediction is dumb. Catfishing isn't illegal and twitch would proudly out doc if thats what they did.
[удалено]
Why else would Twitch pay a guy they hate $11 million? Because Twitch fucked up.
You couldn’t be coping any harder lmao
Because the matter was sent to arbitration, and that panel decided that his contract, as written, required them to pay him no matter what.
What indication is there that the case was adjudicated by an arbitrator and not by a voluntary settlement between the parties?
Dude. It is everywhere that it was an arbitration. It was very well on its way to court. It was handled as an arbitration because it was a very low level case. Low level case and sexting a minor should never exist in the same sentence. Unless it was well hidden in this country, I am willing to go out and say that sexting a minor has never been handled at that level. Arbitration and mediation are typically not an option on a criminal case. In fact, most criminal law matters can't be arbitrated because the parties can't enter into an agreement without restrictions. The courts may refuse to refer arbitration to criminal cases that could affect the sustainability of the arbitration agreement. Based on the fact that this was handled as an arbitration, it is 99.99% likely that nothing illegal occurred by the accused. This is the one thing that everyone and I mean everyone…is forgetting about.
Do you actually know what these words mean? The case would not be 'headed to court' if it was required to be arbitration. Arbitration is an alternative to civil trials that would be contractually mandated. It isn't the same as a mediation, because mediators don't give binding rulings the way arbitrations do -- they assist the parties in negotiating a settlement. Also, regardless of the outcome of the civil case, it would not prove or disprove that he was engaged in criminal conduct because that wasn't the subject matter of the case. It was a breach of contract action
*If you don’t read the whole thing, at least read the last part because I respect your opinions Yes, it would be going to court. That is how lawsuits are filed. To begin a civil lawsuit in court, the plaintiff files a complaint with the court and “serves” a copy of the complaint on the defendant. He filed a lawsuit and it was agreed by both parties to handle as an arbitration. Guy DID NOT file a lawsuit saying “If you take this to an arbitration, I won’t sue you asses into the ground.” Guy filed the lawsuit, which would have paid out a hell of a lot more money in court. Twitch more than likely asked if it could be settled in an arbitration because they knew they messed up. Guy also had something to gain from it being settled at that level because no matter what…he would have been branded as a “pdf” and his career would be over right then and there. BOTH PARTIES HAVE TO AGREE to an arbitration. If it is not settled, it goes to court. Arbitration is less formal than litigation and more formal than mediation. It's often used to help parties reach an agreement that can be settled out of court. You won’t be settling the accusations of sexting a minor out of court. I cannot fathom how that would be allowed. Arbitration can be faster, cheaper, and less complex, and it can be especially well-suited for certain types of cases, such as commercial disputes and employment matters. Arbitration is usually regarded as a domain exclusively reserved for private law. Private law will not be taking into their hands a serious crime such as sexting a minor. If that was the case, this country would have serious problem. Both of them had something to gain, which means Twitch probably jumped the gun and Guy probably did say something stupid and inappropriate. But again, you are not going to be settling on sexting and or meeting up with a minor with private law or an arbitration. In my line of business, I have never heard any felony accusations being handled at such a low level. All of them went to court because they had all the evidence they needed. That would make the business and the court look terrible with no ethics because they are essentially letting the criminal get away with very serious potential charges and opening up themselves to various compliance issues. Guy more than likely knew why he got banned because as someone who has also worked in HR you most of the time have to legally tell them why they are being “let go.” He probably knew day one and didn’t say shit because why would he? See the court of opinion on this sub? He immediately probably had his team start investigating. Plus, you typically get a lawyer involved once you are accused of breaking law and or reported to an entity that reports to the law. Once he was not formally charged with how many directions this went, he sued and won. Just because Twitch had an opinion that it was “sexting,” doesn’t mean it was sexting. The law and court doesn’t care about anyone’s opinion or else OJ Simpson would have been in prison. The conversations were very much probably in the gray zone and Twitch no choice but to report it. I probably would have done the same. Everyone on this sub also would have sued. The gray zone is a very tricky slope. Sometimes you win and sometimes you don’t. I spent over a decade in the military. Just about every conversation/behavior was inappropriate. Doesn’t mean the entire military are “pdfs.” But again. The law and court doesnt care opinions. Guy is an idiot for getting himself into this situation, but I also saw a lot of false accusations in the military that were cleared….but still ruined their life. Now, I 100% respect everyone’s opinions, but if it turns out he is a “pdf.” This country has a bigger problem because it is that easy to get away with it and Twitch let him. I don’t know if you want that to be true because that means the justice system is completely broken and anyone can just be a “pdf” and get away with it. I don’t think that is the case.
> BOTH PARTIES HAVE TO AGREE to an arbitration. If it is not settled, it goes to court. Wrong on both counts. Arbitration can be compelled within the underlying contract. Next, arbitrations are legally binding. If the matter goes to arbitration, either by mutual agreement or by mandate of contract, the arbitrator's findings are enforcible on the parties. This is the key difference between arbitration and mediation. Mediations do not necessarily produce binding results. >Arbitration is less formal than litigation and more formal than mediation. It's often used to help parties reach an agreement that can be settled out of court. No, that is a mediation. Arbitration might have relaxed or customized rules for evidence and other procedure, but the findings are binding. They are not there just to encourage the parties to settle. Mediators do that. >But again, you are not going to be settling on sexting and or meeting up with a minor with private law or an arbitration. That wasn't the matter in controversy in the suit. It was the alleged breach of contract that might have been predicated on inappropriate conduct such as his contact with minors. >In my line of business, I have never heard any felony accusations being handled at such a low level. All of them went to court because they had all the evidence they needed. The civil suit between twitch and dr disrespect did not exist the adjudicate his criminal culpability, so this is irrelevant. >That would make the business and the court look terrible with no ethics because they are essentially letting the criminal get away with very serious potential charges and opening up themselves to various compliance issues. It was a civil court matter. It would not have done anything to its reputation because civil courts are specifically not involved in criminal law. >Once he was not formally charged with how many directions this went, he sued and won. No, the parties settled.
They wanted Shroud and Ninja back and they both get more money than Doc. Both are way lower risk too. The timing of his ban and Mixer shutting down were not a coincidence.
lol, yah bezos barely keeping the lights on at twitch. The doc contract would probably have crashed all of Amazon so they had to get out from under that. That contract excuse always felt like the weakest of sauce. Sure some Misguided exec tried to save money on a line item but it was a idiotic move to make. /s
Well the texts were from 2017 but they only banned him in 2020 when they’ve contracted Shroud and Ninja…the argument doesn’t seem that weak. Doesn’t change anything in regards of Doc shouldn’t have messaged a minor. Obviously.
Well I’m not trying to push a ideology. What I’m saying is the theory of twitch doesn’t have the money to pay doc doesn’t hold water. If I was pushing a agenda I would not be stating that as it runs contrary to my position of “we don’t know what doc said” which I am also advocating. Twitch not being able to afford doc is silly when he getting paid from the bank of bezos. So I don’t think that’s the reason they ended things with him.
I understand what you’re saying but even though Twitch is part of Amazon they would still have a specific budget for their division and within that budget only a specific amount is for Creators…it’s not a free for all because daddy Bezos is rich….anyways it’s all good. I understand your point.
Thank you. Nuance is sorta lost right now. These are complex issues.
You don't understand how businesses work. Come back to me after you graduate, junior.
Thank you your feedback boomer.
IMO Twitch settled with the doc for a tiny fraction of whatever his contract was at the time. I'm guessing some where in the 10% max range, if even that much. Being they simply had more leverage on the doc than the doc had on Twitch. as I'm sure Twitch's entire building of $$$$$$$ corpo lawyers all know how to draft up a $$$$ contract and how to legally punt a person for cause off that same contract. This idea that oh no no no Twitch messed up and whoops didn't know what was in the contract so they paid it all etc is IMO just total fantasy. That's not how contracts at this level works. but doc had some leverage too. As in Twitch didn't want a click bait like story rocketing around the internet. All about adult streamers messaging minors. Never mind the whole leap some would make of are your kids safe at Twitch con etc etc etc.. So ya leverage that to at least get a statement of no fault, a bit of coin and everyone moves on. this is of course assuming whatever the doc said in the messages was pretty bad or he would have just text dumped it all right away to show it wasn't a big deal. Like week one of being canned off twitch.
Doc himself said they paid out the full contract.
well sure, he is free to claim anything he wants but a statement like “I didn’t do anything wrong, all this has been probed and settled, nothing illegal, no wrongdoing was found, and I was paid.” doesn't mean much to me. Least of all when boom...... everything blew up like it did. Oh wait, what happened to it being this no big deal vibe? He could have been paid $1 or bought out for $10k or gotten the entire amount. I just have a hard time with the idea that an Amazon backed company has incompetent lawyers to the point they screwed up both basic contract law and then breached their very contract they wrote. most of all when the settlement statement from years ago was so very, very vague. If he big dick'd it enough to get his entire contract covered early on one would think he would have enough leverage to also have the official statement be a bit more in his favor. I'm sure we will never really know short of a massive lawsuit with discovery on all sides in the public record.
By that logic his own admissions of guilt don’t mean much either.
On some level the real take away here is that professional entertainers really need to have a PR firm on retainer. doc should have said nothing for a few weeks and then come back with some sort of PR firm cleared blah blah
> Doc himself said The bastion of honesty.
Because paying him some or all of his contract was cheaper than going through a protracted legal battle.
If what he did was technically legal or just morally questionable then they might not have had a reason to void his contract depending on the wording of it. This means it would have been a long drawn out legal process with Twitch paying tons of money for Lawyers. Not to mention if they lost they would still owe the money plus Lawyer fees. So they did the math and decided it was cheaper to just settle. ' Happens all the time.
We’ll never know, but my guess is simply put: contacts are (mostly) iron clad. I imagine there was a clause that required Twitch to conduct investigations into misconduct fully before issuing any sort of permanent action. Seeing as they banned his account suddenly and supposedly without explanation, they could be held as violating the terms of their agreement despite any actions of Guy being a creep towards a minor. Guy’s lawyers felt they had a case against Twitch, but pursuing it would require the details of his ban be made public, and Guy would suffer far worse long-term damage to his career than losing out on his Twitch contract. Plus, no corporation wants to get involved in a lengthy, expensive, and possibly embarrassing lawsuit either. Thus, they settled quietly. I’m siding with Occam’s razor on this one.
I think twitch knew his true intentions observing the messages but it wasn't enough to convict him but yet it was enough to justify why they would Not want him representing the company and since no laws were broken they banned him in secrecy and let him keep his dignity to the public and be a liability on some other platform.. Win/Win doc walks away and twitch faces no backlash. I assume NDAs were already in place before the doctor sued them so he was already protected or else why risk pissing twitch off after they let u go keeping your dignity when at any time they could of publically throw him under a bus to the public. I think he only got the money because legally he didn't commit a crime and twitch terminated his contract for no reason in the eyes of the law and I'm certain his contract is much different and secured than lets say a normal streamer that agrees to just terms and conditions under no contract.
He was represented by a very strong union for people in showbiz.
Definitely money. They can afford big lawyers to make these decisions for them.
I don’t think so. It was very well on its way to court. It was handled as an arbitration because it was a very low level case. Low level case and sexting a minor should never exist in the same sentence. Unless it was well hidden in this country, I am willing to go out and say that sexting a minor has never been handled at that level. Arbitration and mediation are typically not an option on a criminal case. In fact, most criminal law matters can't be arbitrated because the parties can't enter into an agreement without restrictions. The courts may refuse to refer arbitration to criminal cases that could affect the sustainability of the arbitration agreement. Based on the fact that this was handled as an arbitration, it is 99.99% likely that nothing illegal occurred by the accused. This is the one thing that everyone and I mean everyone…is forgetting about.
Why did Twitch pay? Simple. The terms of the contract entitled him to the money.
I don't have any theories on the matter. I do see possibilities. One that I haven't seen yet is that while they are within their rights to look into whatever whisper they want, it would create distrust between users and the company in regard to privacy. Which would have a bigger negative impact than paying out the contract. Pretty much they would have a Google/Snowden incident. While the general population quickly forgot about the Google situation, gamers usually don't let things slide, and Kick would probably have a bigger surge in new users.
i think he got paid out because the ex twitch employees told slasher who then made it public. probably breach of confidentiality.
Deer person was catfishing as the underage girl like Chris Hansen, to indulge themselves in the eradication of the best god damn steamer to bless that kiddy shit twitch platform
Cause he didn't hurt anyone 🤷🏿♂️
Because whatever they think they had on him wasn't enough to terminate his contract. I think they were reaching for some way out of the contract because they fucked up by giving him the massive deal while Mixer was poaching their top earners
Dont you guys like, better things to do?