Naughty Dog | An important statement from Naughty Dog

We have recently read on social media that an ex-employee of Naughty Dog, Dave Ballard, claims he was sexually harassed when he worked at Naughty Dog. We have not found any evidence of having received allegations from Mr. Ballard that he was harassed in any way at Naughty Dog or Sony Interactive Entertainment.

Read Full Story >>
The story is too old to be commented.
UCForce371d ago (Edited 371d ago )

"Sigh" I don't know who I can trust here. Do I trust ND or Dave ? That's the problem. Dave have to name a person who harasses him, not entire studio. And ND keep their statement are too short, need more explanation. This is like we living a grey world.

naruga371d ago ShowReplies(7)
freshslicepizza371d ago (Edited 371d ago )

Well now it is up to the (ex) employee to move forward and provide some sort of proof. I don't imagine there will be others coming forward making the same claims (at least I hope not). That's the thing we these claims, you have to have more support than just allegations. If others came forward it would help him immensely. If he has some documentations even e-mails then that can help.

I would think this person has something to support his claim otherwise he wouldn't go public about it.

rainslacker371d ago

If it is really important to Ballard, then he needs to retain a lawyer, and pursue legal action. Unless he's just trying to get the word out and not seeking compensation.

My wife is a lawyer who handles a lot of SH cases, most of them pro-bono, and too many people derail their own case by trying to win in the court of public opinion.

The only court that matters in such cases is the court of law. If he still wants to get the word out while in court, he has to go the distance, and not settle.

it's an unfair system for showing poor company practices, but it can work for the victim if they actually worry more about themselves than trying to prove to the public that they are telling the truth. His agenda needs to be to himself, because ultimately, that's all the court is going to care about.

The biggest problem I would see in his case is if it's true he never made an allegation to the appropriate people in the company, or if the policies of said company were not "open door" enough to allow it. If he never filed a complaint until after the break down, and the break down was such that it set up an uncomfortable work environment for others, then there isn't much that will come of the case, because it's usually the lack of action on a companies part which is used to paint them as negligent on protecting their employees. It's that negligence which allows monetary compensation to be won. Without negligence, there is no wrong-doing in cases like this.

Sadly, SH cases are often like sexual assult or rape cases, where the victim is blamed, but in cases of sexual harassment, it's imperative that the company management at some level be informed that it's going on. Most companies never even assume it's happening unless expressly brought to their attention, because it's a difficult conversation to have, and accusing or implying someone is doing it when they aren't tends to make those people uncomfortable.

That being said, Ballard needs to decide if he wants compensation, or wants to inform the public for some reason. If it's the former, then he should remove himself from the media and retain a lawyer before proceeding. If it's the latter, then he should really write more than a few paragraphs, and provide more details for the public to be informed, instead of relying on the knee-jerk to sustain his support. Sony right now is in a stronger position to refute his claims, and could easily throw him under the bus if a serious break down occurred.

spreadlove371d ago

Let's say for argument sake that he was inappropriately advanced and touched. How do you prove that?

Even if you go to HR, unless you put something in writing then fat chance there will be any proof except for his dismissal.

Eonjay371d ago

It's over. They are saying they don't have any records of him coming to them about allegations. He actually never said he did. He only said he had a mental breakdown and was fired. And was subsequently offered a separation package.

Zeref371d ago

This situation is difficult. There is probably no proof. The proof could have been if he had taken the "hush" money but he refused that. So what else is there? Camera evidence from years ago? They probably deleted it.

But I tend to take the victims side in this case simply because for men it's very difficult to come out and say you've been harassed sexually. And he will not gain anything from saying it without proof.

Kribwalker371d ago


“Eonjay1h ago
It's over. They are saying they don't have any records of him coming to them about allegations. He actually never said he did. He only said he had a mental breakdown and was fired. And was subsequently offered a separation package.”

he implicitly said he went to HR with his alegations and the subsequently fired him and offered him hush money.

Eonjay371d ago

They said they don't have any record of him staring he was harassed nor does he. He has no hush money? Emails to HR? Names? Anything? We can't take allegations seriously if the accuser offers nothing.
Plus HE said, he was terminated for a breakdown, not that he was terminated because he went to HR about harassment.

nX371d ago Show
Goozex371d ago Show
Kribwalker371d ago


i suggest you actually read what he said

“In late 2015, I was sexually harassed at Naughty Dog by a lead. My work environment became extremely toxic afterward. In February 2016 I had a mental breakdown at work & Sony Playstation HR became involved. When I told them about the harassment they ended the call and fired me the next day. They cited the company was moving in a different direction and my job was no longer needed.”

Skull521371d ago Show
Many-hat5371d ago

@rainslacker. I think your assessment is pretty accurate, and I guess your wife being a lawyer helps you keep relatively objective about it. In doing so, however, you highlight the weakness in the legal system, where justice is secondary. If you mention truth, you are likely to be sneered at by the courtroom barristers. You may be judged by a jury of your peers, but you are hanged by the legal system. Morality and legality, are very different animals. I hope 'truth' wins in the end for Mr Ballard and ND.

Mulando371d ago

Well cases like this can never get really proved. That's the problem here. You can believe someone more than the other but never 100% prove something. If he was fired like this, no one is so "stupid" to write the real reason down somewhere.

pinkcrocodile75371d ago

@rainslacker I completely agree, I couldn't put it better myself.

Gwiz371d ago

Can you really provide proof in these matters?unless you tape it but those sorts of evidence are dismissed in court usually when you tape someone without their consent.

indyman7777370d ago (Edited 370d ago )

Oh and yeah we do see the irony of the name: "NAUGHTY DOG". The name does them no favors.

I have to agree with EONJAY on this. What they said in reply to what he said is default reply for when a company is guilty. Just like politicians they did not address what he ACTUALLY said. Just insinuated that nothing happened because of their record. If this was so why would they give him severance for depression from it?

Usually the plaintiff goes public to put more pressure on the accused because they think the person is too weak or "ashamed" to go public with what happened.

Come on your honor their name is NAUGHTY DOG for heavens sake!

+ Show (12) more repliesLast reply 370d ago
OB1Biker371d ago (Edited 371d ago )

Well you don't have to 'trust' anyone What I do know is social media is not the place things can or should be cleared.

gangsta_red371d ago

It's not really a need to trust anyone.

You just can't name a person without proof because not only could you get sued but also ruin that person's rep (if it's not true).

What else can ND say? They can't legally go into full details on why a person left the company and they definitely can't give out info on why they fired a person.

IMO, this all seems a little far fetched. Not accepting 20 grand? Ok...that's commendable but if a company offered me that I would know that I had them by the balls and would definitely demand more or take them to court. And to be out of work for 17 months with ND on your resume?? Now that is cause for questioning.

spreadlove371d ago (Edited 371d ago )


This guy worked on Uncharted 2, 3, and 4. He isn't someone that hasn't been there a long time, and to not find work afterwards speaks volume about Sony. Either they keep really bad employees around for years, then also rehires them, or something happened and David can't get the references he need for the next job i.e. sexual harassment prevents him from using them or expecting positive reference.

My bet is that something definitely went down and sexual harassment did happen. Maybe after this, more people will come forward. He isn't the only one too:

rainslacker371d ago (Edited 371d ago )

The 20K seems more like a severance offering in the face of a potential lawsuit where Sony would obviously know he could potentially win more. Even if he didn't win, the court costs and lawyer fees would be much more substantial than that. The NDA itself is just common practice upon termination...willful or otherwise, and is built into the NDA that is signed when accepting employment. The exit one is usually just to reaffirm the NDA. Whether it's signed or not is meaningless in face of the employment one. I'd be very surprised if the NDA mentioned by Ballard specifically cited the sexual harassment allegation, as that would be strong evidence in court that Sony was trying to cover it up.

Not knowing Ballard, it's hard to say if he felt it was a bribe of some sort(or interpreted it that way), or if he was even aware he could leverage the situation for more money. Based on him waiting so long, I don't think monetary compensation was his primary concern. I also don't feel he felt the need to hurt the company over this because he waited so long. Feeling ashamed about it doesn't explain why he waited so long to be honest, but it also confuses me why he wouldn't retain a lawyer if he wanted more compensation.

ND can't really say much to be honest. Even if they wanted to, their lawyers would say no, because they wouldn't want anything to be used in court. This press release seems pretty boiler plate outside them saying they don't have any record of him filing a complaint....which I assume they meant before the breakdown if Ballard's original statements are true.

Truth is, even if he accepted the 20K, that wouldn't preclude him from seeking legal remedy. Courts tend to take a dim view on such bribes, if there is a real case of sexual harassment to be judged. My wife has handled many cases where the person was offered money in return for silence, and those cases tend to be stronger in court, because there is actually something there which proves the company is trying to cover things up.

Otherwise, you make a good point. The company itself can not legally give details on his termination. Even if they wanted to protect themselves, or throw him under the bus, or whatever, it's a big no-no to do such a thing. I've seen some companies release statements which imply without actually saying, but it's pretty rare. In the face of a potential lawsuit though, I wouldn't expect much more from Sony or ND on this.

And yeah, something big happened to keep him out of work. Either that, or he just wasn't trying to find a job. Given the insular nature of the gaming industry, it's highly likely that someone at most of the developers out there would be able to find the reasons he was let go....either directly, or through the grape vine.

I think people would be surprised at just how much people in the game industry know the business of everyone else. It's kind of like high school to be honest. If he had a major breakdown which was disruptive to work, lashing out and what not, then no doubt there would be talk about it. Even if the company itself wouldn't divulge what happened, it doesn't mean that others in the company wouldn't do so in an unofficial way. It happens a lot, and it's very easy to find an employees quality without ever calling up management. Very likely if this becomes a big thing, I'll end up hearing about it somewhere, although I have no desire to pursue the details and instigate the conversation among my peers.

spreadlove371d ago

I don't think you can misinterpret it, and severance is completely separate. Any NDA is signed prior, not after the fact.

The fact that he hasn't come forward also speaks volumes, because this sort of thing can damage a person mentally and drain you. He probably couldn't hold it in anymore and came out with it.

The glaring thing to me is that ND instead of properly investigated (and they can release a statement that they are), they immediately jump to conclusion and release a statement saying there is no evidence. The first step is to actually interview his coworkers and do due diligence.

To be clear, there is at least one other person that claims to have been sexually harassed too (not the same harasser though)

rainslacker371d ago

I believe Ballard feels he was sexually harassed. I have no reason to doubt him on that at this moment.

I have no idea the sequence of events which led to his breakdown, Sony HR's intervention, and his eventual termination, nor if the exit offering was a simple severance or a bribe.

The PR statement is pretty boilerplate for what I'd expect in response.

The line that they didn't receive any complaint, assumedly before the break down at least, is about the only thing outside the ordinary, and not something typically lied about if it was possible to prove otherwise. However, there is doubt there, and no way to know 100%.

I'm surprised they even released this statement so quickly. Normally, it'd take longer.

I do think though that maybe this isn't a company wide thing, as it's rare for large companies to foster an environment where SH is common or accepted. Every big company in the world has pretty strict policies on SH....although not every company follows those policies, or handles disciplinary action according to those polices, or sometimes the policies just suck....although we can't know that here.

spreadlove371d ago (Edited 371d ago )

There is some form of sexual harassment in almost every large company. The issue is more that when it is reported it should be taken seriously, not fire the guy and offer a bribe.

Considering the person is a long time employee that left, and then was accepted back speaks volumes about his work and ability to work with the team.

We won't know for sure based on what has been revealed, but that boilerplate response from Naughty Dog says nothing. HR knows to cover tracks to avoid issues like this.

rainslacker371d ago

I agree 100% no one should be fired for filing a complaint. That is actually illegal in most states.

however, there is a mitigating circumstance here that Sony HR got involved AFTER his break down, which implies to me the break down was something serious, and potentially disruptive to the office in some way. It's the nature of that break down which I think may have lead to the termination, although will concede that him making a claim at that time may have had something to do with it.

There are just too many aspects of Ballards claims which leave unanswered questions, and that is a big one. The other big one was if there was negligence on Sony or ND's part on the handling of the sexual harassment itself. There is nothing that indicates that there was a complaint before the break down for them to investigate. There is also nothing to say what happened to the accused or if an investigation took place after he reported it to Sony's HR.....even if the complaint was made because of the break down it still should have been investigated.

I agree the boilerplate response from ND says nothing, and I really expected nothing more.

What it does say beyond the boilerplate though is that they had no complaint to which I assume they mean before his break down. Again though, it kind of leaves the same questions, and we're unlikely to hear any answers going forward from Sony or ND. Ballard may offer up more details, but given the way he first reported the harassment, there is always going to be that seed of doubt.

It's why I think he should retain a lawyer if he feels there is negligence on Sony's part, and especially if he was fired for reporting the sexual harassment. Sony obviously isn't going to put in his employee file that being the reason for his termination, but if enough evidence can be provided of negligence on their part of handling the harassment, or them actually letting him go due to his complaint, then he can win. That being said, I highly doubt the NDA and "bribe" were specifically spelled out the sexual harassment as a topic to not be discussed. That would be damning for Sony, and no lawyer in the company would approve such a draft.

Liqu1d371d ago

You don't trust either party since there's no evidence it did/didn't happen, it's just he said she said. Remain neutral unless substantial proof comes to light.

DillyDilly371d ago

Just gotta hope more current / former employees start speaking out

rainslacker371d ago

That's assuming there is more of it happening at the company itself.

I'm sure it exists, because it exists at every big company, but so far, this would be the 2nd report of such a thing, which is exceptionally low for a company with 300 people. Granted, internally, there are likely more complaints, because with 300+ people, sometimes things get said which can lead to a complaint, even if those things aren't a major issue requiring termination of the accused.

I'd prefer to hope that the instances at the company are few and there is no need for people to speak out. I'd prefer they speak out to those within the company who can resolve the issue, because trying to resolve it through social media is the wrong approach at this time. The only time to try and resolve this through social media is after all available avenues have failed. No doubt, come Monday, ND will be having some company wide meeting to reaffirm their SH policies, and let it be known their doors are open for those who feel they've been harassed. It happens after complaints are filed, and a public one like this is going to cause waves.

If it is happening more regularly, then hopefully it can be resolved, but I do believe that the company has to be given the chance to prove their quality before damning them in the public space. Just because there are bad seeds employed there, doesn't mean the company as a whole fosters or supports such an environment, and the company ideals may very well be wholeheartedly against such behavior in a big way.

We'll see I guess.

bluefox755371d ago (Edited 371d ago )

Don't have to place your trust anyone, just trust the evidence. Innocent until proven guilty. If there is evidence of wrong doing, it will come out. Until then, there's no point in blindly speculating.

spreadlove371d ago (Edited 371d ago )

Fanboyism aside here, when somebody with their personal name goes out and says they are sexually harassed, and tells you they were offered $20k. I tend to believe them. If you open up the dirty laundry of your previous employer, you are putting yourself at risk for being shunned from new employers later.

David isn't the only one that complained too, at least another user came forward of another one:

It is not conclusive evidence or anything, but not finding evidence is exactly the sort of statement a company would make to cover their butt. I'm sure this happens at other companies too, so I'm not trying to take sides here. Hearing this from the company you worked for so many years, and worked on great games like almost the entire Uncharted series is got to be hard.

UCForce371d ago

@Morganfell I get it. But the problem for me is that, it's just so conflicted. I just don't know.

DarXyde371d ago

It's tough for a number of reasons. On one hand, Naughty Dog as a company seems to be a collective of well-intended people. But on the other hand, that could be personal biases talking, and the whole just about never represents the intentions of the individual. What gets me is the whole "sweeping it under the rug" thing. Would Naughty Dog as a subsidiary of Sony do that? Probably not. I just can't see it. Would Sony themselves do that? Depends on what you think about Ke$ha's situation, I suppose. Doesn't help that this statement specifically tries to exonerate Naughty Dog and SIE; the parent company is not mentioned however.

Without specifics, Ballard doesn't have much of a case, which begs the question: what's his goal? To spread the word? Most likely. But where is Ballard now? Is he in a place where someone stands to benefit from this? Too many unknowns at this juncture. Here's hoping this is met with justice.

Crueltylizer371d ago

He has nothing to gain from lying. He already stated that he rejected the money he was offered to stay silent, so if he is lying it wouldn't be for the money. And truth be told, most lies like these exists because of money.

371d ago
antikbaka371d ago Show
threefootwang371d ago

Doesn't help that besides not listing anyone in particular, the fact that he made this statement over Twitter versus something like Facebook. Having something serious to say, broken up over multiple posts, just seems silly to me.

TheKingKratos371d ago (Edited 371d ago )

All of this BS from this unemployed dude is BS untill he prove it and he can't
like they say *Put up or Shut up*

psyxon371d ago

Just another disgruntled employee until he proves otherwise as far as I"m concerned.

GamingIVfun371d ago

The thing is, if this guy was upset enough to go to the higher ups about the issue why didn't he pursue the issue further when he says Sony did nothing and fired him for the complaint of sexual harassment. I would have hired a lawyer immediately. Instead he talks about it 17 months after the fact on social media, which will not get his job back or affect the sexual harassment issue at all. Doesn't make much sense at all.

UCForce371d ago

@Skull521 That's very immature from you. I have to report you.

EeJLP-371d ago

Trust neither and move on with your life. It has nothing to do with you.

uth11371d ago

We are living in a gray world. We shouldn't be so quick to judge anything

freshslicepizza369d ago (Edited 369d ago )

Something new to add,

(warning, harsh language)

+ Show (19) more repliesLast reply 369d ago
-Foxtrot371d ago

Well someone is telling fibs

Wonder who. Guess we'll never know.

zivtheawesome371d ago

basically there are 3 ways ND could be found guilty of this incident:
1) David Ballard states the name of the one who harrased him, which would in turn make the investigation advance and find the truth.
2) David Ballard finds proof of the harrasment/ the bribe from Sony HR.
3) More ND ex-emploeeys are coming with statements against ND/ the harraser, thus giving more credibilty towards David.
for now because he has not revealed the name, nor shown proof and no other report came, i'll be on ND's side until a future update.

MVGeneral371d ago

This is what I get from this.
He said he was harassed (Not abused) in 2015. He had a mental breakdown in 2016 (may or may not be a result of the the harassment). And there is no specifics of the mental breakdown (he could have got violent, broke property, insubordination, or etc). So HR called him in to let him go. And he used the opportunity at that point to come forward about the harassment (bad timing I suppose). That still Didn't stop him from getting fired. So he was let go. $20000 seems like an appropriate amount for severance, and usually a company makes you sign a non-disclosure agreement upon accepting the severance. So if you refuse to sign it you don't get the money.

Either way I believe in innocent until proven guilty. And so don't throw anyone under the bus. We need more information, proof and he needs to go the police and file a complaint to legitimize his complaint.

371d ago
steveo123456371d ago

Thing is, apparently he was sacked the next day after raising it with HR. Don't know what country theyre based in, but sacking someone for making an acusation in the UK would leave the company wide open legal wise. They have to follow their grievence procedure through.

BTW, its standard practice for a company to NEVER admit liability during that procedure as again if they give that out in writing theyre wide open. Normally they will offer a 'settlement agreement', as in you leave the company, take some cash but sign away your rights to legal action. Sounds like that's whats been done here.

But nobody other than the 2 people involved actually know the truth so we cant really guess at anything

subtenko371d ago

guess you wont, time to move on, there are lots of people being abused and mistreated everywhere, you really wanna spend most of your day trying to play investigator or are you looking into that career field?

Eonjay371d ago

One kinda hopes there is some credibility because the very last thing anyone wants is for people to get away with falsely weaponizing sexual assault.
People really do have to deal with this and it needs to be taken seriously. Such accusations aren't to be thrown around lightly.

Miss_Weeboo371d ago (Edited 371d ago )

Now Dave Ballard should say exactly who harassed him (if someone sexually harassed him is probable he also did it previously with someone else, because that's what people that misuse their position of power to make sexual advances on employees usually do), exactly Who he complained to (person) about the harassment, and exactly Who offered him money, the 20k, to silence him (and by the way that's a crime too); and let's hear what these people have to say then.

Kribwalker371d ago

yep. this could get really messy before it’s all said and done. i don’t feel this guy would risk any chance of a career in something he is this passionate about by making this stuff up.

Razzer371d ago (Edited 371d ago )

You would be surprised what disgruntled fired employees will do. I’m not saying that is the case here, but it is a possibility.

spreadlove371d ago

That is how I feel to, si i;m inclined to believe him. However, we should make a conclusion based on lack of evidence.,

Dark_Knightmare2371d ago

Yeah because it's so normal to be out of work for 17 months. It seems his career was already on shaky ground

KwietStorm371d ago

You don't know this guy and you don't know the people at Naughty Dog. Nobody should be taking sides AT ALL. Even when serious allegations like this come about, it doesn't mean the "victim" is telling the truth. People lie all the time. It's the world we live in. We won't know what happened or didn't happen until everything clears.

+ Show (1) more replyLast reply 371d ago
UCForce371d ago

That's the problem. I don't know he going to say it or not.

371d ago
spreadlove371d ago (Edited 371d ago )

What would naming the accused do?

It won't shed any more light on this and leaves you open to retaliation.

Dark_Knightmare2371d ago

Well it's a hell of a lot better than just saying you were sexually harrassed and not providing any proof

spreadlove371d ago


This is why people don't come forward, because the bar of proving it is really high, while the damage to oneself is certain. What proof can he possibly show? That somebody touched him inappropriately (if that happened) or made unwanted advances repeatedly verbally?

The glaring thing here is that Naughty Dog without proper investigation, immediately puts out a statement. The proper thing here is to interview his coworkers so due diligence is at least one clue.

uth11371d ago

The burden of proof is and must be on the claimant.

Otherwise unscrupulous people would exploit the system for their own gain without regard for the damaged reputations of innocents they cause.

I mean we see enough of that already. Yes, some things are by nature tough to prove. But i really don't think you'd want to live where the burden of proof is on the defendant.

spreadlove370d ago (Edited 370d ago )


I think the burden of proof should be on both sides. We can't really expect the accused to investigate themselves, but we can expect the complicit party to do due diligence which in this case is Naughty Dog. It doesn't appear like they are.

I also think we should be careful about siding with the party in power here, which is also ND, because the risk is much higher for the individual with an immediate loss for someone that has a lot to lose.

+ Show (1) more replyLast reply 370d ago
rainslacker371d ago (Edited 371d ago )

If he wants to pursue legal action, the only person he should offer up the available information to at this time is a lawyer. If I had to give Ballard any advice at this point, it would be shut up, and call a lawyer.

I realize curiosity is taking over here, and we all want to know the details, but in this case, I'm going to side with the victim if he feels there is a real SH case here.

My curiosity isn't as important as his remedy. As such, he should not in any way try to convince the internet that he is right. His lawyer can do that later. The more he talks about this on social media, the weaker his case becomes. It sucks for us who want to know, but it's more about him getting justice if it's due.

I know this from watching my wife work, and just how much more difficult it is for her to win cases because people want to be believed. At this time, if he is pursuing legal action though, he needs to think only of himself, and allow his lawyer to get the information that is neccesarry to litigate the case.

I understand the need to be believed in cases like this, because one can find support from others, but that support is mostly short lived in the face of actual remedy which goes further to promote better sexual harassment policies among companies as a whole. If he really cares to fight sexual harassment beyond his own remedy, he needs to retain a lawyer first. Let that lawyer handle the press. The second he retains a lawyer, is the moment when he takes control away from Sony.

It's an unfair system set up to make it hard for the victim to receive remedy, but it's what it is. It's only through more cases being tried, not just settled, for things to become better. If it's tried, the details will come, outside of the records being sealed, but at that time, he can take less money in return for keeping the records public. Most people take the money though, so most cases like this, even if not settled, tend to never see the details made public.

On the other hand, if he just wants to inform and highlight the problem, then yeah, he can offer up all that information. Some he can't do legally, or should be very careful about doing such a thing, as he opens himself up for slander claims....whether true or not. Again, another unfair part of the justice system.

The biggest detail I see left out is when a complaint was actually made. If it wasn't made before his breakdown, I can't see any negligence on Sony's part, because I don't know if it's right to hold a company culpable for something they are unaware of. That detail is a key part of this which is left out of ballards statements, although ND's response indicates that they never received a complaint.

After that, the disciplinary action against the accused, if warranted, is what's important.

I feel the "bribe" is a different matter, whose import falls upon the sequence of events which led to such a thing. The "bribe" is reaching point Z(termination), from point A(harassment instance) while passing over or barely paying attention to point B-Y(complaint, investigation by Sony, outcome of investigation, diciplinary action, break down, his quality of work due to stress, etc.)

BeOpenMinded371d ago (Edited 371d ago )

Usually in these cases the money has to be returned if it was part of a settlement agreement in which you pay for silence. An ex girlfriend of mine was drugged by a doctor we worked with and if it ever gets exposed she would have to give money back. The hospital didnt care... they asked him to settle... these companies don't care about anything but secrecy and not decency. Unfortunately this is the world we live in. It seems that this person is not content with just being paid to shut up ultimately. I could be wrong

Edit: if he agreed to taking money then all evidence would have been destroyed by a third party as per how these settlements usually work

+ Show (2) more repliesLast reply 370d ago
WePlayDirty371d ago (Edited 371d ago )

Accusations are not truth, that much should be fully understood. If Dave wants to tell his story, he should say who he was harassed by and what individual from Sony offered 20k for him not to talk about it.