Infinium should draw back from HardOCP before it's too late

LAST WEEK the headlines were screaming that Kyle Bennett of HardOCP was suing Infinium Labs. Very few people know what's happening, and what lead up to this event. Lets look at it, from the beginning.

Infinium claims it is making a console called the Phantom, and the first reference I saw to that came in this CNN article. It is very light on details, and puts the time of the Phantom "coming out" as "a few weeks ago", call it around August 1, 2003 give or take a bit.

The next big story about the Phantom and Infinium is on HardOCP, here. Kyle Bennett summarises what information evidence he can find, clearly differentiating the internal commentary and discussion from what he can dig up and quote. At the end, there is a section called "Our Thoughts & Opinions", which I take it means this is where he starts to speculate based on the evidence he has gathered.

About six months later, HardOCP filed two different sets of letters from two different firms of lawyers, delivered on the same day, here. They basically say that after about half a year, we think the story is wrong. If you take it down, we won't sue you. Pretty standard stuff so far.

Kyle responds with: "I have extended HardOCP.com's pledge to correct any and all possible inconsistencies or errors in our editorial entitled, "Behind the Phantom Console" personally to Timothy Roberts and Kevin Bachus of Infinium Labs and they have yet to inform HardOCP.com of any information we presented as being not correct". So far, so good. It goes on to say that he has been asking the Infinium folk for the same info since the day the article was published. In my opinion, this was, and is a more than reasonable request.

Fast forward two weeks. Infinium's lawyers sent another letter to Kyle, making 18 points that they believe were wrong. Kyle agreed to change 5 of them, and stands by the Gamespot story , a piece entitled HardOCP sues Infinium Labs.

Before you start scratching your head, the suit is not about getting Infinium to give him money or go away, it is about him proving he was right. In a lot of words, more legalese, and enough paperwork to choke the proverbial horse, he is claiming: "I am right, and did not do anything wrong, can I get a court document saying so please".

If Kyle wins this application , he will have a great deal of ammunition with which to wage any further battles.

Out of deference to the way the lawyers want to see things, I will state that from now on, everything here is my opinion.

Over the last year, I've noticed that the more roaches a company is trying to hide, the more defensive it gets about things. If a company is trying to cover up what it considers to be a negative story, its best tactic is to post a reasoned reply on their web site about what it feels is the truth, and refute the arguments with facts. Lawyers and press bring lots of additional unwanted attention.

By threatening Kyle Bennett and HardOCP, Infinium is doing the very thing it should not be doing, giving the original story more attention than it deserves. People who read about this kind of thing generally ask "what is this case actually about", not "what product is this company making".

HardOCP has got more hits for the original story now than since it was originally published. People who never read the original are asking questions about it now. An old dead story has been revived, thanks to the brilliant strategic minds at Infinium. This article wouldn't be here if it wasn't for the legal action.

It's a PR disaster for Infinium. What are the chances that any gaming site, the ones Infinium needs to get the industry buzz going enough to give it a chance will touch them now with a barge pole?

If I was running Infinium, I would do three things. First, point out why Kyle is wrong on my own web site. Nothing huge, not a front page thing, but a blurb that you can point people who question you to. Don't wave a flag at your deficiencies, real or perceived.

Next, retract any threats. Ask him nicely to change anything that is wrong, and provide him the evidence he needs to fix it. If you sue him, you only add to your image problems.

Lastly, send him a console. Even if it is only a bare prototype with wires hanging out the side that don't really do much. He knows what it takes to do tech R&D. He won't slaughter you for it not being finished yet, I'm sure. Look at his reviews of other beta/unfinished hardware to see what you can expect. This will turn hugely negative press into potentially positive press.

So, what it comes down to is how Infinium wants to play this. Will it sue, and so burn every bridge in the industry? Any questions in court will go on the public record, and Kyle has a bigger voice than you do.

Either way, it will be good news for us news sites, and will get Infinium lots of press, and the original article even more press. It will not be the kind of press a company tends to want however. Is that what Infinium really wants? Turn this round guys, there is still time. Just not much. µ