DR. SARAFI lawyers win important verdict for Scurrows versus Shurjoka

Hamburg, November 20, 2024 — The Hamburg Regional Court convicts streamer Shurjoka of untrue allegations of harassment and Nazi insults. Breakthrough for streamer rights in the digital space.

facts

Our client, known under the pseudonym Scurrows, is a successful influencer and streamer. On platforms such as Twitch, he regularly broadcasts live content and interacts directly with his audience, which has built up a broad fan base.

As part of his job, our client visited Gamescom in 2017 and filmed himself with a selfie stick during a live stream on Twitch. He met various streamers and conducted spontaneous interviews, including with streamer Shurjoka. During their conversation, both parties discussed their activities and experiences at the trade fair. Our client filmed himself with the selfie stick, and Shurjoka also came into the camera's field of view. During the conversation, there were no suggestive remarks or provocations from our client. Since filming with a selfie stick is usually done from an elevated position, her cleavage was also visible due to the excerpt of Shurjoka. Both parties split up amicably after a friendly conversation.

A few years later, Shurjoka began publicly alleging that our client harassed her and other women at Gamescom 2017. She only let the issue rest because our client had allegedly “received a lot of hate for similar sexist allegations from other women about Gamescom.”

Escalation of allegations

In the summer of 2023, Shurjoka repeated this allegation in a stream that she directed at well-known YouTuber KuchenTV. She warned him not to talk to our client because there were allegedly allegations against him “of harassment of some influencers, including me, at Gamescom in recent years.” She continued to denigrate our client as a “Nazi troll,” accusing him of a connection to National Socialism for no reason.

In response to these allegations, our client released a video on July 4, 2023 showing the parties meeting at Gamescom 2017. There is no evidence of any harassment on this video — neither towards Shurjoka nor towards other women. Instead, the video shows that, as was typical for such events at the time, our client was out and about with a selfie stick, filming what was happening and interviewing people. With this video, our client was able to rehabilitate himself and refute the allegations and received a lot of public support.

New fabricated allegations

Shurjoka then used a different tactic. She suddenly addressed events that were supposedly not shown on the video. On the same day as our client's video was released, she published a statement that had been viewed over 1.5 million times up to the verdict and claimed that our client had been running around throughout the day “filming into the cleavage of streamers, and then [pretended] that was 'no intention. '”

She also explained that she had met our client again at Gamescom, he waved his cell phone in front of her and said that “the chat would be happy” if she showed more, as this was good for the number of clicks. However, all allegations were fictitious. Shurjoka has repeatedly made big announcements of this, but did not provide any evidence until the verdict was handed down. It should not go unmentioned that — as is often the case with allegations of harassment — it was not just Shurjoka and our client who were present in the present case, but several people. In addition, the whole thing took place in public spaces and was streamed live on Twitch. However, Shurjoka was not prevented from repeating these allegations over and over again.

Legal Intervention

Because of the seriousness of these allegations, we issued a warning against Shurjoka in 2023. However, the deadline for submitting a declaration of injunctive relief allowed her to pass fruitlessly. As a result, a lawsuit was filed. The other side claimed that “harassment of influencers” did not exclusively mean women. However, this approach was completely absurd simply because it was clear from the context of Shurjoka's statements that she specifically spoke of women and explicitly portrayed them as victims of our client.

Shurjoka's lawyers first tried to convince the court that her client's statements were to be understood and accepted as expressions of opinion. The attempt to mislead the court is also interesting: In court, they claimed that it had been retaliated and not only meant women, but later they argued that these women did exist, but that they had to be identified.

Legal assessment

During the hearing, the Hamburg Regional Court admitted to Shurjoka that she may have found the situation at Gamescom 2017 harassing. This should be accepted as a subjective expression of opinion and not prohibited.

In the judgment of November 15, 2024, the court found that the statement from 2020, which referred to “sexist harassment”, could not be considered together with the statement from 2023, as too much time had passed and only spoke of harassment in 2023.

However, with regard to the further allegations, in particular the allegation that there were additional allegations made by other women against our client, these were false statements of fact. Shurjoka was unable to provide proof of these allegations. The attempt to convince the court that Shurjoka had suddenly meant no harassment of women by “harassment” was rejected as unconvincing, as it was clear that she had not responded. The understanding of the average recipient, who would clearly understand the statement in this context, is decisive.

The statement “Nazi troll” was also classified by the court as seriously defamatory and was therefore prohibited. There were no links to this allegation, meaning that the statement was inadmissible.

The verdict

Shurjoka was sentenced by court to refrain from making the following allegations about our client:

• There would be “a lot of hate because of similar sexist allegations from other women about Gamescom,”
• There are “various allegations” against our client “of harassment of some female influencers” “at Gamescom in recent years.”
• Our client had “been walking around at the trade fair all day with a selfie stick” and “filmed from above into the cleavage of female streamers, and then [pretended] that was 'no intention. '”
• Our client would have waved his cell phone in front of Shurjoka and said, “Chat would be happy if I showed more and that would be good for the clicks.”
• Our client is a “Nazi troll”

conclusion

The decision of the Hamburg Regional Court shows how important it is to take consistent legal action against false allegations and defamatory statements. Even subjective feelings must not result in false statements of fact or baseless insults.

Our client was able to successfully enforce his rights and send a clear signal against damage to his reputation. DR. SARAFI lawyers stand for effective protection against defamatory attacks — particularly in the digital space.