Did you not honestly read what I just sent. Emails can create legally binding contracts.
The theme is
written contract and not what email can create!
Where is the written contract?
h4ns alleges: game-protect violated a written contract, resulting in damages, in the specific act referenced here. game-protect did not make the victims of this act roughly whole, AND it is not the case that all of the victims forgave the act. It is not grossly inaccurate to say that the act occurred around July 2019. No previously-created flag covers this same act, unless the flag was created with inaccurate data preventing its acceptance. I just posted a damn link stating that in the EU an email can be considered a written god-damn contract.
Please... read...
https://www.icaew.com/archive/library/subject-gateways/law/legal-alert/2018-02/case-law-court-confirms-emails-can-create-legally-binding-contractshttps://parissmith.co.uk/blog/even-emails-text-messaging-can-constitute-legally-binding-agreement/The parties exchanged a series of emails where they agreed a series of amendments to a standard-form document. The language used was far from formal legalese and it even included text speak. At the end of the negotiations, one of the parties asked the other to provide a full and complete signed agreement incorporating all the key terms. In fact, this document was never drafted (never mind signed), but the court confirmed that the parties intended to be bound by the terms which they informally negotiated and agreed in the emails. The court went further and said that if a person puts his name on an email to indicate that it comes with his authority and he takes responsibility for its contents, it will be deemed to be a signature for the purpose of section 4 of the Statute of Frauds 1677. This is the case even where only the first name, initials or perhaps even a nickname is used.
This is Golden Ocean Group Ltd v Sagacor Mining Industries PVT Ltd and another [2012] EWCA Civ 265, UK.
IE, by placing your name or entity "Game Protect", that you take legal responsibility for its contents.
Id be hard pressed to find a judge that wouldn't run in h4ns' favour at this point.