When did I say I didn't read it?Not my fault you had no chance to read it, so please scale down on the sarcasmmeter. It would have spared me a couple of your questions, if you had. Was an "interesting" read, I can tell you this much. L&P was literally foaming at the mouth, he truly lost it.
It would be a muddy go and no way most lawyers would go the full way for something like this, but there are further laws covering things in the whole range of §631-650 BGB, teleological approaches of Unsatisfibility §323 BGB or funny teleological approaches of §311 ff BGB, but that goes too deep. Point is, true Mäzenatentum or Sponsoring is regulated differently.
This whole thread is full of false themes, ranging from simple misinterpreted sentences (which is easy, as some of the participants here, including L&P himself are not native English speakers) to straight lies.
I'm not accusing you as one of these, not even sarcastically. I did read his post (and didn't like his tone at all), but I don't remember seeing the "Further hot content" statement. Maybe it's me who misinterpreted his post (no sarcasm here also), that's why I asked for proof.
Why I say it's convenient for you is because your whole theory of (the dev) "said it would be hot" and "Calling this pic hot" is based upon an erased post the dev made in times of anger (which is a shame on his side), and which you remembered contains the statement "Further hot content"... That's a very fragile theory, and when you say, multiple times, that the dev said this spoiler render would be hot, you're actually accusing him as a liar who deliberately tell lies to earn more money.