Electronic Arts and Origin have come for their pound of flesh.

　　In two scathing documents filed last week in San Diego Superior Court, Ultima Online makers Electronic Arts and Origin Systems Inc. - in language that could qualify as a Dennis Miller rant - accuse attorney George Schultz of "pursuing a public vendetta" against the companies and conducting a prosecution "fueled by emotion, prejudice, and questionable legal practices."

　　On June 29, 1998, attorneys representing EA and Origin filed both a demurrer and a motion to compel discovery. The first argues to have the suit filed last April thrown out entirely, and the second requests that the plaintiffs (those suing EA and Origin) make themselves more readily available to EA/ Origin attorneys.

　　In a legal skirmish that took place just yesterday morning, Schultz's motion to have a hearing on the two filings postponed was rejected. Absent further legal wrangling, a hearing to determine the legal validity of the June 29 filings will be heard on July 31.

　　Now, the rant.

　　Accusing Schultz of varying degrees of unprofessional conduct, shoddy legal workmanship, and including among the plaintiffs a "man with a significant criminal history," EA/Origin attorneys make a claim that the lawsuit against them is a complaint "long on conclusion and short on facts." In addition, the attorneys claim that the lawsuit "suffers from fatal defects" based on "vague allegations grossly inadequate to state a legal claim."

　　The motion to compel states in part, "The plaintiffs' counsel have extremely busy since November 1997 pursuing a public vendetta against defendants, but when the suit was finally filed and defendants diligently served discovery, plaintiffs ignored their duty to respond. Ten of sixteen plaintiffs made no responses, and three plaintiffs refused to appear for their noticed depositions - failures that were perhaps predictable, given that the prosecution of the suit by the plaintiffs' counsel seems fueled by emotion, prejudice, and questionable legal practices. Defendants, who have been bombarded by rumors and vilifications from plaintiffs' counsel, simply sought - and hereby seek - appropriate discovery responses from plaintiffs." In other words: Don't bad-mouth us without making the whiners available for follow-up questions.

　　Calling Schultz an avid gamer - and an avid complainer - EA/Origin documents portray the attorney representing the plaintiffs as a loose cannon with chutzpah to spare. "By late September 1997 at the latest, Mr. Schultz, using his pen name 'Bun-boy' and his standard signature line: 'The people who smile have found someone else to blame,' had begun vociferously complaining about the game."

　　The EA/Origin attorneys then document a campaign conducted online whereby Schultz churned the waters of gamer discontent and began to "rumor-monger" and "vilify defendants."

　　"He likened defendants to makers of the exploding Pinto automobiles; he likened them to makers of drugs that caused deformed babies; he engaged in extended comparison of defendants' supposed 'big lie' and Adolf Hitler's infamous 'Big Lie.'"

　　The document accuses Schultz of making "scandalous... sexist and racist" posts in order to defame Ultima Online as well - and being "relentlessly hostile to his own clients when they express doubts about the suit."

　　The defendants' motion to compel concludes: "Plaintiffs and their counsel have been working on this case since November 1997 and have spared no time or energy in vilifying defendants, but when it came time to produce discovery responses to the defendants... the plaintiffs and their counsel thoroughly failed to discharge their duties. ...Defendants seek an order compelling complete and immediate responses from all plaintiffs."

　　The next volley in the Ultima Online lawsuit takes place when the judge hearing the case decides on the merits of the two Electronic Arts/Origin Systems filings.