Occam's Razor Supports that Hans Niemann did not cheat against Magnus, or in OTB in general.

The kid's just cashing in on his 15 minutes.

Is that a "basic human right"? In which international convention is that precise "right" enshrined?

Even if it is in the UN declaration (or equivalent) I am pretty sure it wouldn't apply to civil proceedings with what amounts to name calling. So again, you're typing utter nonsense which you think sounds convincing rather than just climb down from this pointless position you are defending.

But proving Magnus and chess.com guilty is going to be very difficult. It's good that you agree they are innocent until proven guilty. But don't you also agree that proving that guilt is going to be very difficult given Hans own admissions to cheating? 

And don't you think that suing may not be too wise, since he's suing people and institutions that are VERY popular? If you ran a tournament, and you knew the controversy surrounding Hans, wouldn't you think twice about inviting him? And what if you knew other, better players, may skip your event if they knew Hans would show up? 

He brought this on himself. I can't think of ONE single person who would hint or insinuate Hans cheated, if he never did cheat. 

I'm not sure what the wisest thing Hans should do is.

On one hand suing these chess institutions and personalities can't help his career significantly per se.

However, on the other hand, he really doesn't have many good choices based on the circumstances. 

If he didn't cheat, then he has all the right in the world to pursue this avenue. 

It's certainly a conundrum, where any action you take might be hurtful, so to find the least hurtful avenue is the priority.

If Hans didn't cheat, then he's probably taking the best avenue you can. It's unfortunate he has to sue top personalities, but the defaming, libel, etc. was fairly significant and he was backed into a corner.

If the lawsuit works out in Hans favor even a little bit, it could clear his name and he can resume his chess career.

If his lawsuit doesn't work out, then it probably isn't any worse than what Magnus is already doing to him, destroying his chess career either way. 

No crime has been committed either way. You don't have the "human right" to act poorly as a teenager and then never have that behaviour raised again. This is more akin to being deplatformed because of past Twitter posts. It may be unfair, but no human rights have been breached.

Hans can't "clear his name" of the cheating he himself has admitted to. He compromised himself from the beginning and will just have to live with it. If he knuckles down, learns some humility (assuming he doesn't have a personality disorder which makes that impossible like Lance Armstrong for example) and keeps winning then he can still have a lucrative career.

I'm not sure proving Magnus is guilty via causing his chess career opportunities to plummet is difficult at all. It should actually be his easiest argument. There is a plethora of evidence Magnus negatively affected his chess career with either blatant or inferred accusations that Hans cheated OTB.

Magnus really can't do this legally without any strong evidence or proof, and since it can be easily argued Magnus then affected Hans chess career negatively, I see a reasonable case.

However, chess.com is different. Chess.com never said Hans cheated OTB, or really even inferred it. They are a private website that can ban people for no reason at all. So I'm not sure what his case would really be here.

He can't clear his name from past online cheating, but he can certainly clear his name of OTB cheating because he stated he didn't do it, and continues to play at his expected level even with increased security. 

King I don't like the way magnus created this drama but this suite is a joke.  Hans is the one suing so the innocent until proven guilty one since its an American courts is magnus and co hans is the one who has to prove they intended to damage his career and KNEW he was not cheating.  The worst part is the man had already won if anything more people know this guy than ever before you cant prove magnus intended to end his career he never said that ever. In fact it seems more likely to me he just didn't give a crap about hans or his career at all and was indifferent to the impact it had on him he wanted to crack down on cheating.  Either way Hans is the one sueing its on him to prove things he cannot prove now.  Also if you go read his suite there are some childish rants that make no sense inside its just a narcissistic kids from generation meme with lawyers who know "lol we get paid either way".  This was a bad move and I have a feeling magnus and co are not gonna be super nice and just let him drop it with what a pain in he butt he is being about all of this. He didn't need to apologize he didn't need to confess publicly for Danny all  the kid had to do was nothing and he was golden but he just has not yet learned in life when its best to keep ones mouth shut.  

Magnus will likely do nothing. In the event this frivolous lawsuit is not thrown out of court then the most that could happen would be him being served papers. He can stop visiting the US if he becomes sufficiently concerned but the likelihood of things going that far are very low.

Magnus and Nakamura are both 3 out of 4.

Review the Lance Armstrong case.  The similarities are striking.

Time will tell, but honestly I think this effectively kills his chess career either way.  If he loses the case, people will view it as a vindication of thinking he has been cheating.  If he wins, no organizer/player will want to go near him for fear of being sued if they even hint that something was up with his play.

But that aside, I would suggest you stop trying to argue in Hans' favor until you read the actual filing.  To say it is not the work of a legal scholar is an understatement.

I wouldn't go so far as to say he is an idiot, but I do not think it is a smart move.  Anytime you go this route, you have to consider the endgame.  Take the Depp-Heard trial, for example.  The endgame for Johnny was to clear his name so he could get back to work (he was basically blacklisted because of what Amber wrote).  So what is the endgame here?  If Hans loses the case (which I think is likely), his career is over.  If Hans wins the case, he is not going to get $100M from each defendant, and his career is over.

If I had to guess, I think he sees this as a way out.  Borislav Ivanov simply stopped playing when he was confronted, but he had an engineering degree to fall back on.  I think this is Hans hoping they will settle and he will be able to cash out with something.

An interesting aside:  if he happens to win any of these cases, I fully expect to see Maxim Dlugy filing a lawsuit (likely with the same legal team) against chess.com.

Sometimes the end game is a forced procedure.

Hans didn't want the endgame to come to this, but he was certainly pressured into by false claims of OTB cheating by top chess personalities.

It was a forced move.

The same way Johnny Depp probably didn't want to sue Amber, it was mostly forced due to his issues getting work, just like Hans.

Borislav has no case so I don't understand the comparison. The guy cheated OTB. There is no evidence Hans cheated OTB.

Maxim Dlugy should file a lawsuit as well. Magnus inferences of cheating without proof is ridiculous. 

But against chess.com, I'm not sure Dlugy can win. He might, but who knows. He did admit to cheating online so I doubt it.

He may have seen it that way, but in his case it was most definitely not a forced move (unless he actually was cheating and knew that he would no longer be able to hide it well enough - that is what Lance Armstrong tried to do).

I really do not understand how you got through medical school with your level of reading comprehension.

The point was Borislav simply walked away from the game, but he had something to fall back on.  Whether or not Hans cheated is irrelevant to that comparison.  It was purely a comparison of outcomes.

You cannot claim defamation on implications.  He literally has no case against Magnus.  I can see that going before the judge:  "Your honor, he implied I was a cheater."  "Oh, what did he say?"  "I said he must be doing a great job with his mentee as he has been playing extremely well".  "Case dismissed".

Dlugy has a better case against chess.com for making the confidential emails public, which could potentially damage his reputation.  And if you read the emails carefully, you see the problem with his "admission".  When Chess.com "catches" you, they give you an option:  admit you cheated and say you won't do it again, or don't play here.  That is effectively an admission under duress.

Niemann has ensured that he is known as a chess cheat for the rest of his life. He is just making sure every non-chess player knows that as well now.

Who's to say he did? We have no verification of it. Even his profile picture has a grainy, fake look about it.

Could you elaborate on that? Because both halves of your sentence are... weird, so to say. One might think that the opposite is obviously true in both regards.

No judge will award $100M in damages per defendant for a market that is only ~$200M in total.  I am not sure what Missouri law allows, but in VA, if there is a cap on punitive damages (that is why Johnny Depp did not get the full amount awarded by the jury).  Even without those caps by law, it will be capped by the judge.  He can make a case for compensatory damages for events lost, but that is difficult to prove in the cases of winnings versus appearance fees.

In regards to why it effectively ends his competitive Chess career: if he wins, everyone will know he is willing to sue and has been successful in punishing people who accuse him of cheating, so organizers and players would both avoid him (this was the strategy Lance Armstrong tried to employ before they were able to detect what he was doing).  If he loses, it will be viewed (rightly or wrongly) that he is a cheat and organizers and players will avoid him.  In either case, this is a no-win for him in terms of continuing a career in competitive Chess.  The only way he wins in this is by cashing out because he is tired of the competitive Chess lifestyle.

In terms of if Magnus would be subject to the ruling: basically, yes.  Unless he never wanted to do business in the US again.  He could certainly say he does not recognize the authority of a US court, to which the government would reply, "fine, we do not grant you a visa ..."

Legal Twitter has been analyzing the lawsuit all night.  Well worth the read if you are interested in that kind of stuff.  Suffice it to say that there are some massive holes in the filing, and there is a reason it was filed in Missouri instead of any of the states the involved parties are in (CT, FL, AZ, CA, NY): Missouri is not an Anti-SLAPP state (meaning filing a frivolous lawsuit does not risk you being forced to pay damages to the defendants).  That was done very intentionally.