Current Events > Hans Niemann Files $100 Million Lawsuit Against Magnus Carlsen

(+) Yeah! (+)

https://www.wsj.com/articles/chess-cheating-hans-niemann-magnus-carlsen-lawsuit-11666291319

is this about the bluetooth buttplug

What an entitled little b****.

Lol imagine having the gumption

He's a proven cheater

DipDipDiver posted...

He's a proven cheater

Against magnus?

TurtleInFreedom posted...

What an entitled little b****.

I mean, without hard evidence, its defamatory. Let them a match naked and settle it once and for all.

The best part about all this is that Magnus hasn't really said anything defamatory. He's been vague about it and his only direct actions have been to give up on his first turn against Hans. Cheating liar Hans has no ground to stand on.

nice i hope he wins

Swagger_Dagger posted...

The best part about all this is that Magnus hasn't really said anything defamatory. He's been vague about it and his only direct actions have been to give up on his first turn against Hans. Cheating liar Hans has no ground to stand on.

https://gamefaqs.gamespot.com/a/user_image/8/8/6/AAfUNcAADzIu.jpg

CARRRNE_ASADA posted...

I mean, without hard evidence, its defamatory. Let them a match naked and settle it once and for all.

Magnus simply withdrew from a tournament and put out a statement that was probably better by multiple lawyers.

No way was it defamatory. And Hans is already a known cheater.

Hans has no chance to win this lol

Magnus Carlsen seems like a sore loser but this is just dumb. I honestly never want to hear about this story again now

Mr_hulk88 posted...

https://gamefaqs.gamespot.com/a/user_image/8/8/6/AAfUNcAADzIu.jpg

(I know he's not directly affirming that Hans cheated against him. But I wouldn't call it vague either when he says "I resigned because I believe Hans has cheaded before")

That was a well thought out (and legally reviewed) post that doesnt really allege anything except past acts that have been confirmed.

Its an interesting move by Hans because if it goes anywhere his past cheating will become an issue that the defense will want to bring up.

What happened to "The Chess will speak for itself" lmao

whitelytning posted...

That was a well thought out (and legally reviewed) post that doesnt really allege anything except past acts that have been confirmed.

Its an interesting move by Hans because if it goes anywhere his past cheating will become an issue that the defense will want to bring up.

I mean yes, but what kinda plays agaisnt Magnus' careful statement is that he did play against Hans. It was after he lost that he resigned.

If he had resigned before them playing then sure it's valid to say "i dont want to play against this person who i believe cheated" , but in this case the statement ends up being kind of an indirect implication of Hans cheating in their game.

Mr_hulk88 posted...

I mean yes, but what kinda plays agaisnt Magnus' careful statement is that he did play against Hans.

It was after he lost that he resigned, in their next game.

If he had resigned before them playing, then it would be harmless to say "i dont want to play against this person who i believe might be a cheater" .
In this case though the statement ends up being kind of an indirect implication of Hans cheating in the game they had already.

Regardless, the wording of his statement isn't defamatory.

Lot of armchair attorneys in this thread but looking at Oved & Oved's (crack boutique NY firm) history they clearly have some kind of plan here and are extremely competent. I really doubt they'd have taken this case for Hans if they don't believe they can get a settlement. Hans definitely does not have the money to make this case worth it with attorney's fees alone from an opportunity cost perspective.

Based on my reading this case is really about the actions allegedly taken by Chess.com and Play Magnus which are co-defendents to Carlsen. It's not just the tweets and resignations.

meestermj posted...

Regardless, the wording of his statement isn't defamatory.

Well it's not "regardless" because the context matters.

Mr_hulk88 posted...

Well it's not "regardless" because the context matters.

Legally speaking, it doesn't.
His exact wording is "I believe".
It's not a statement of fact or an accusation, merely an opinion.

You can tell his lawyer reviewed that statement before it was posted. It wouldn't have been posted if it were defamatory.

Legally speaking, there are two easy outs here.

1. Its only libel if the statements are false. If its proven that Hans cheated, the libel is moot.
2. Libel requires the actor to state a purported FACT that is false about the victim. Opinions do not qualify as slander. So unless Carlson directly said he cheated, and not that he THINKS he cheated, the claim is moot generally speaking.

Also Hans will need to prove he suffered some sort of damages.

He himself admitted to cheating.

Eramir posted...

He himself admitted to cheating.

Yeah. Hope he gets laughed out of court.

Yeah. I guess he should've just sued the news sites that literally wrote "Magnus formally accuses Hans of cheating" , those are for sure defamatory.

SF_Okami posted...

Also Hans will need to prove he suffered some sort of damages.

Pretty easy to prove damage to reputation in this instance. Almost trivial I'd say.

SF_Okami posted...

Its only libel if the statements are false. If its proven that Hans cheated, the libel is moot

All the charges, for reference
https://gamefaqs.gamespot.com/a/user_image/1/3/3/AAcZIZAADzMl.jpg

Note that for a civil suit it's not like you have to prove all of these charges or none. Libel is offered if the jury finds evidence is strong enough for that but it's perfectly valid for the jury to find no libel but find tortious interference or slander.

Eramir posted...

He himself admitted to cheating.

Not in any circumstance at issue in the lawsuit.

Mr_hulk88 posted...

Well it's not "regardless" because the context matters.

In no universe does it matter.

Chess lawsuits should end immediately with a wedgie and a swirlie for both parties

MarcyWarcy posted...

Chess lawsuits should end immediately with a wedgie and a swirlie for both parties

magnus is fucking ripped. he's a goddamn machine. no one giving him anything that he doesnt want.

I told you guys magnus was right when this story first hit. recently chess.com found 100s of examples of Hans cheating online when they looked into his history. Hans is a liar and piece of shit and a cheater who's double-trippling down on his own bullshit. Hans is a con man.

magnus played this guy and he knew that he wasn't anywhere on his level. it's hard for people to understand when the skill level is this high.

and ive said it before: you just don't know magnus. he's actually fucking awesome. he would never, ever, accuse someone of cheating just because he lost.

it's not like he hasn't lost a game before.

Swagger_Dagger posted...

The best part about all this is that Magnus hasn't really said anything defamatory. He's been vague about it and his only direct actions have been to give up on his first turn against Hans. Cheating liar Hans has no ground to stand on.

Nah. Literally everyone interpreted it as an accusation of cheating. He's not going to just be able to go "I didn't say he was cheating I just said it was super unlikely that he wasn't cheating."

Robot2600 posted...

magnus played this guy and he knew that he wasn't anywhere on his level. it's hard for people to understand when the skill level is this high.

Then why did Kasparov say Magnus played terribly?
He didn't support his implications against Hans that's for sure.

he would never, ever, accuse someone of cheating just because he lost.

it's not like he hasn't lost a game before.

He has history of being a sore loser and make drama

Mr_hulk88 posted...

Why did Kasparov say Magnus played terribly?
He didn't support his implications against Hans that's for sure.

He has history of being a sore loser and make drama

Kasparov accused IBM of cheating in the Deep Blue matches.

And, of course, Kasparov was almost certainly right about that. And he was certainly wrong about Magnus. He underestimated magnus, but I don't think Magnus is underestimating Hans.

Sometimes accusations can be right.

Being a sore loser is exactly my point. He is 100% a sore loser, but he doesn't accuse people of cheating just because he lost.

The chess.com review is pretty damning evidence:

https://www.chess.com/news/view/chesscom-hans-niemann-report-cheating

it's enough that I think the world should definitely be more inclined to listen to magnus on this one. the chess.com review only happened after he resigned that game, so his action had the desired effect of prompting an investigation by the community. that investigation (done by people that are business competitors of magnus...magnus runs his own chess site too) should carry a lot of weight.

ultimately it's beyond damning. hans is 100% a fucking cheater.

whitelytning posted...

That was a well thought out (and legally reviewed) post that doesnt really allege anything except past acts that have been confirmed.

Its an interesting move by Hans because if it goes anywhere his past cheating will become an issue that the defense will want to bring up.

He has only ever cheated in online matches where it is trivially easy to do so.

Dont hate me but, how does one cheat at Chess?

Jiggy101011 posted...

Dont hate me but, how does one cheat at Chess?

using an AI chess engine

Jiggy101011 posted...

Dont hate me but, how does one cheat at Chess?

Input the current board state to a video game and see what move the computer makes

A human has not beaten a top level chess program since 2006

SodomInsane posted...

What happened to "The Chess will speak for itself" lmao

The chess is what he named his team of lawyers

Robot2600 posted...

Kasparov accused IBM of cheating in the Deep Blue matches.

And, of course, Kasparov was almost certainly right about that. And he was certainly wrong about Magnus. He underestimated magnus, but I don't think Magnus is underestimating Hans.

Sometimes accusations can be right.

Being a sore loser is exactly my point. He is 100% a sore loser, but he doesn't accuse people of cheating just because he lost.

The chess.com review is pretty damning evidence:

https://www.chess.com/news/view/chesscom-hans-niemann-report-cheating

it's enough that I think the world should definitely be more inclined to listen to magnus on this one. the chess.com review only happened after he resigned that game, so his action had the desired effect of prompting an investigation by the community. that investigation (done by people that are business competitors of magnus...magnus runs his own chess site too) should carry a lot of weight.

Well I thought Magnus was cool so it would be dissapointing if it turned out he was wrong, kinda embarrassing.

ultimately it's beyond damning. hans is 100% a fucking cheater.

He might be a cheater but the fact is that as of now no signs of cheating in this events were found.
He passed the cheating test and there's no confirmation that he didn't win legitimately

i get that, but it's just not believable.

blutooth buttplug aside, a body-language system between him and another person (i.e. his coach) could accomplish the same thing.

Robot2600 posted...

blutooth buttplug aside, a body-language system between him and another person (i.e. his coach) could accomplish the same thing.

His coach was there? I'm not sure

I hope he wins then immediately loses all of that money. These two nerds need to get swirlied or something

blutooth buttplug aside, a body-language system between him and another person (i.e. his coach) could accomplish the same thing.

so i have a weird angle on this because i used to be accused of cheating constantly in some games, and whenever i crossed the path of some streamer dingdong it generally meant i had to deal with their asswipe chat members who would swing by and try to get revenge, occasionally using cheats themselves.

i don't care about his reputation at all. a person's past is not proof that they did something in the here and now.

do you have anything concrete that says niemann cheated in the match against carlsen?

Doe posted...

Lot of armchair attorneys in this thread but looking at Oved & Oved's (crack boutique NY firm) history they clearly have some kind of plan here and are extremely competent. I really doubt they'd have taken this case for Hans if they don't believe they can get a settlement. Hans definitely does not have the money to make this case worth it with attorney's fees alone from an opportunity cost perspective.

Based on my reading this case is really about the actions allegedly taken by Chess.com and Play Magnus which are co-defendents to Carlsen. It's not just the tweets and resignations.

Thank you for pointing out that there are co-defendants. I didnt even see that and was reacting to what seemed like a suit against Magnus personally (I see Naka too now). Makes a bit more sense to sue the chess.com.

I just skimmed through the suit and still think its a money grab that they dont really went to go anywhere. Dont get me wrong, he has some merit to be upset that he cant play anymore but the target here is chess.com more than Magnus IMO. Including the conspiracy and anti trust counts seem to be shots at chess.com to get them to the table.

The fact that they only went after people tied to chess.com when many other well known GMs were saying similar things is also telling.

I think they end up settling for some unknown amount (a few mil) and let him back on the site. Then lets see if he can win again with real security measures.

Smashingpmkns posted...

I hope he wins then immediately loses all of that money.

thats random.. and at the same time Hans does have this "i pissed all the money in 2 days" air about him

The fact that Magnus won the entire tournament EVEN THOUGH he had a loss to Niemann (via the 1-more resignation) is evidence that Niemann is not stronger than Magnus. Niemann got a free W against the strongest player in the tourney. He should have cleaned shop if he's so good.

from the NPR article:
https://www.npr.org/2022/09/27/1125316142/chess-magnus-carlsen-hans-niemann-cheating

For in-person events like the Sept. 4 match, organizers "try to do everything they can" to block cheating, grandmaster Maurice Ashley recently told NPR. But in the open halls where some matches take place, he added, players don't always need a device to gain an unfair edge.

"I know of a situation with a player where the coach had a code for where they stood on the floor," Ashley said, "and they just had to stand in the right place for you to know what piece to move."

If the coach stood in a corner, for instance, that could signal the player to move their bishop.

And past actions DO matter. He cheated online. He cheated more and lied about it. He tried to make it seem like he was coming clean from mistakes made as a kid, BUT HE WAS STILL DOING IT ONLINE, all the while trying to gain sympathy and cred for being bullied?

A liar is a fucking liar.

To make it worse, Hans's coach used to cheat also:
https://www.foxsports.com.au/more-sports/accused-chess-cheater-hans-niemann-wins-match-after-very-thorough-security-scan/news-story/00fec1179b4f2652153efa88271378b6

One of Niemanns coaches, grandmaster Maxim Dlugy, also admitted to cheating in two of his own online tournaments, according to emails released last week.

In the first incident, the 56-year-old claimed he didnt know he was cheating during the match but later found out that one of his students was watching and using chess AI to feed him moves.

Here is a list of recent events, with prize money, that Hans cheated in:
https://gamefaqs.gamespot.com/a/user_image/2/3/9/AABHfBAADzOP.png

so why would anyone believe a goddamn word out of his mouth?

it's going to be a long slog. oved and oved comes credentialled, but defamation suits are very tough to win.

and they engrafted a sherman act claim, likely based on the acquisition of magnusplays by chess.com. the damages flowing from monopoly power being exerted by chess.com are not the same as the damages flowing from defamatory statements made by chess.com

so, you don't.