|
EightAce posted:Not a chance , the only way anyone is going to see CIG's books is if they fail to deliver and go bankrupt. They can use backer money to take this to court and produce a half decent defense that they do have something out there that people are playing, in fact they are making it available to more people each month in blocks. I think (and may be completely wrong) that The "RSI" part of the money (the part they got after the original 2,134,375$ they got form KS) is pretty much their own and they can indeed do whatever they wish to do with it as long as they are not judged "fraudulent activities" by a court of Justice. Caveat Emptor, Product for entertainement value only, ect. The Original 2,1M, however, are bound more tightly by KS terms of services and the Pitch made to get them. A judge could decide something like "Ok, those 96 other millions the public gave you after November 19 2012, even if they where gathered on very questionable marketing practices, are your own and you are free to do as you wish with them. But for the 2,1m you got from KS you promised a game, delivered by 2014. You pushed back that release date twice, and we are now in 2016 and you refuse to give a new one. The Alpha 2.0 you delivered is not the product you pitched , advertised and promised to the 2,1M backers and they want to be explained what happened to that money. This is a resonable request and a decent company should be able to produce its books in a fair ammount of time. I give you 3 months to produce an accounting document of how the 2,1M in funds you received from Kickstater where used. Also since you now have 96 other millions in funding, anyone of the original 2,1m backers, if upon reading said documents find you showed a lack of faith from your part, can ask for a refund of the original ammount backed, to be granted in full. Courts are not always about big " Make them PAY !" showdows. Sometime its just "i want to see X" agaist "I would rather not show you X".
|
#
?
Dec 4, 2015 17:21
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 24, 2024 23:32 |
|
|
I'm a bit out of the loop, but what purpose does the lawsuit have now ? No matter how buggy and messy 2.0 is, it's still enough for any court investigator to judge it as a very early alpha. Which should be proof enough to kick DS out and maybe counter sue him for defamation.
|
|
#
?
Dec 4, 2015 17:28
|
|
|
peter gabriel posted:Proudest moment of my life right here So we took it one step further. Because, you know, you can never be too sure.   Also, duplicate music track is fixed as well. Both thanks to you. Great job!
|
|
#
?
Dec 4, 2015 17:32
|
|
|
Hammerstein posted:I'm a bit out of the loop, but what purpose does the lawsuit have now ? No matter how buggy and messy 2.0 is, it's still enough for any court investigator to judge it as a very early alpha. Which should be proof enough to kick DS out and maybe counter sue him for defamation. What about all the false advertising for a feature complete game due out a year ago. I don't know much about the law, but I'd like to hear more about that than the technical details of floating points and rendering pipelines.
|
|
#
?
Dec 4, 2015 17:34
|
|
|
So how long until we find out Derek smart(rear end) is actually Chris(t) Roberts? It was all a money laundering ploy.
|
|
#
?
Dec 4, 2015 17:34
|
|
|
Jeesis posted:So how long until we find out Derek smart(rear end) is actually Chris(t) Roberts? It was all a money laundering ploy. When Ben Lesnick is as anorexic as Sandra Roberts
|
|
#
?
Dec 4, 2015 17:37
|
|
|
D_Smart posted:So we took it one step further. Because, you know, you can never be too sure. I'd honestly still switch it to "Press ESC to Quit" since I tend to associate "close" with "close window" and "quit" with "Quit this loving app/game" but that may be just me. Especially since in the next menu, you ask "Is it ok to quit?" NO IT'S NOT OK TO QUIT, I WANTED TO CLOSE {THE MENU}! Sorry for the UI sperg OWLS! fucked around with this message at 17:44 on Dec 4, 2015 |
|
#
?
Dec 4, 2015 17:40
|
|
|
Hammerstein posted:I'm a bit out of the loop, but what purpose does the lawsuit have now ? No matter how buggy and messy 2.0 is, it's still enough for any court investigator to judge it as a very early alpha. Which should be proof enough to kick DS out and maybe counter sue him for defamation. Maybe not since the original part of the project funding, based on promises made at that time, is now unfulfilled and overdue by two years, still without a final delivery date. The good question is "how much did that original 2,1m, allowed CIG to gather the 96 other ?" and that is what the court will have to debate. What do you do when 96m in funding are gathered by using a fraudulent 2,1M KS project ?
|
|
#
?
Dec 4, 2015 17:46
|
|
|
aleksendr posted:Maybe not since the original part of the project funding, based on promises made at that time, is now unfulfilled and overdue by two years, still without a final delivery date. I thought the kickstarter promises have been overdue for just a few days now and in 6 months it'll be overdue for all the other backers. But Derek talks so much it's hard to remember these things.
|
|
#
?
Dec 4, 2015 17:58
|
|
|
star citizen dot png
|
|
#
?
Dec 4, 2015 17:59
|
|
|
Hammerstein posted:I'm a bit out of the loop, but what purpose does the lawsuit have now ? No matter how buggy and messy 2.0 is, it's still enough for any court investigator to judge it as a very early alpha. Which should be proof enough to kick DS out and maybe counter sue him for defamation. They haven't delivered the fully functioning game they sold to kickstarters or anywhere remotely near it, telling the KS backers "ah yes but what we are building now is much more than you pledged for" isn't going to fly in any court of law. If I pay you to build me a house and you promise to deliver in 2 years you don't get to keep my money indefinitely with the argument that "well you see after you paid me a bunch of other people gave me more money so I'd build a fully functioning Fallout Vault under your home and this will take several years more, you'll just have to be patient".
|
|
#
?
Dec 4, 2015 18:01
|
|
|
aleksendr posted:The Original 2,1M, however, are bound more tightly by KS terms of services and the Pitch made to get them. I don't believe the kickstarter terms of service mean anything, as Kickstarter would likely stab someone just to stay out of any legal mess, they aren't going to try to enforce anything so their terms don't matter. The pitch does matter because that's part of the contract between each kickstarter backer and CIG/RSI. In the EU anything that someone says as a representative of the company can be used as an advertisement for the game, you'd need to have read/heard it before you entered the contract. So that means even backers using the RSI site can point to the kickstarter page as their understanding of what they were getting, or more likely as this is Star Citizen, not getting. If you were going at this as misrepresentation of contract, false description of goods or contract inducement then the most likely outcome by far is rescission, basically a full refund. I dunno if I've mentioned this before but in the EU since June 2014, you are entitled to a full refund without giving a reason and that right only ends 14 days after delivery (so basically when/if SQ42 is released, assuming they call Star Citizen released at the same time). Whatever Derek is doing or not doing, I don't believe it's related to normal consumer rights as if it was CIG could just make it go away by refunding anyone involved. That's also the very first thing they tried in July.
|
|
#
?
Dec 4, 2015 18:02
|
|
|
MilesK posted:I thought the kickstarter promises have been overdue for just a few days now and in 6 months it'll be overdue for all the other backers. But Derek talks so much it's hard to remember these things. I think the original KS gave a 2014 delivery date. That date was revised twice over in various TOS before they decided to stop caring and go with "When its done" aleksendr fucked around with this message at 19:11 on Dec 4, 2015 |
|
#
?
Dec 4, 2015 18:02
|
|
|
OWLS! posted:I'd honestly still switch it to "Press ESC to Quit" since I tend to associate "close" with "close window" and "quit" with "Quit this loving app/game" but that may be just me. Especially since in the next menu, you ask "Is it ok to quit?" NO IT'S NOT OK TO QUIT, I WANTED TO CLOSE {THE MENU}! I think esc closes the menu
|
|
#
?
Dec 4, 2015 18:15
|
|
|
AP posted:
This right there would probably need a court to decide. Unlike Physical goods, you can argue long and hard what constitude a "delivery" over a digitally downloaded product. Is the delivery complete when SC goes live ? Then what is SC ? Is the delivery linked to SQ42 ? Then what is all that SC game you keep marketing ? Marketing a product while selling another is not really kosher in commercre law.
|
|
#
?
Dec 4, 2015 18:20
|
|
|
 404 Completed Video Game Not Found
|
|
#
?
Dec 4, 2015 18:24
|
|
|
aleksendr posted:This right there would probably need a court to decide. Unlike Physical goods, you can argue long and hard what constitude a "delivery" over a digitally downloaded product. No, there is no such argument that makes physical different from digital. And only a complete fool would, at this point, get into any debate as to what was promised, compared to what is currently out when the promises (see fraudulent inducement) are numerous, written on the KS, on RSI website, in media news, in forums etc. And what was promised, isn't even 10% delivered yet. Aside from that, only 1/100th of the world promised, is currently out (Stanton/Crusader) - and that's not even finished and they're still trying to figure that out as per the latest around the arse broadcast.
|
|
#
?
Dec 4, 2015 18:27
|
|
|
D_Smart posted:No, there is no such argument that makes physical different from digital. Not to mention that it's not a judge making decisions about 32/64 bit whatever. It's each side bringing in expert witnesses and the jury making a decision on the preponderance of evidence.
|
|
#
?
Dec 4, 2015 18:30
|
|
|
aleksendr posted:This right there would probably need a court to decide. Unlike Physical goods, you can argue long and hard what constitude a "delivery" over a digitally downloaded product. Not in the EU you can't, they specifically say the same right applies to digital downloads. We can argue about this if you like as something hilarious always happens.
|
|
#
?
Dec 4, 2015 18:31
|
|
|
Rabelais D posted:Isn't the money in crowdfunding supposed to go into the product and not into your own pocket as salary? I thought paying yourself a salary out of crowdfunded money was a bit of a no-no - after all, how much salary do you get? And what about retroactively paying yourself for work completed before the crowdfunding? And let's not get into the whole employing your underqualified wife thing.... Why do people always think this? If a kickstarter project becomes wildly successful, they are certainly allowed to keep the extra money as profits. Trying to spend all the money is what leads to scope creep like we see in Star Citizen.
|
|
#
?
Dec 4, 2015 18:33
|
|
|
people arguing over DS/CR lawsuits are living in the same world as people arguing over space insurance adjusters
wyoak fucked around with this message at 18:41 on Dec 4, 2015 |
|
#
?
Dec 4, 2015 18:35
|
|
|
Rabelais D posted:Isn't the money in crowdfunding supposed to go into the product and not into your own pocket as salary? I thought paying yourself a salary out of crowdfunded money was a bit of a no-no - after all, how much salary do you get? And what about retroactively paying yourself for work completed before the crowdfunding? And let's not get into the whole employing your underqualified wife thing.... Salaries are a non-zero percentage of the cost of game development
|
|
#
?
Dec 4, 2015 18:35
|
|
|
I think I might not care anymore whether the lawsuit happens or not. My thread idol is peter gabriel. As long as peter gabriel shines this thread is 
|
|
#
?
Dec 4, 2015 18:45
|
|
|
Wait, what? There's going to be a internet spaceship lawsuit? Is there a summary or something
|
|
#
?
Dec 4, 2015 18:45
|
|
|
AP posted:Not in the EU you can't, they specifically say the same right applies to digital downloads. We can argue about this if you like as something hilarious always happens. Oh no, far from me to stand defending CIG of delivering anything. To clarify, i beleive that for deciding if somethgin has been delivered or not, you have to "define" that something first. This is pretty simple in physical goods. A cup is a cup, if you have no cup or you cant drink from it or hold liquids in it, its not delivered and its also pretty easy for regular digital downloads. You pay, you download, its a "finished" good for sale. But in the case of SC with its 13 sub companies, modules, hangars, Arena commander, PU, PTU, Baby PU, SQ 42, SQ42, mission disk and social buggy experience it is much harder to "define" it and as such give a lot more room for plaintif and defendant to argue if it is "delivered" or not.
|
|
#
?
Dec 4, 2015 18:50
|
|
|
Illegal Username posted:Wait, what? There's going to be a internet spaceship lawsuit? You want a summary of a lawsuit that is yet to happen against a company making a game that has yet to be finished? You'll have to wait 2 weeks for that.
|
|
#
?
Dec 4, 2015 18:50
|
|
|
MeLKoR posted:
|
|
#
?
Dec 4, 2015 18:50
|
|
|
Illegal Username posted:Wait, what? There's going to be a internet spaceship lawsuit? It's early days, we're only seen a rough outline of the courtroom so far and Derek is busy securing the book/movie rights. AP fucked around with this message at 18:56 on Dec 4, 2015 |
|
#
?
Dec 4, 2015 18:51
|
|
|
AP posted:It's early days, we're only seen a a rough outline of the courtroom so far and Derek is busy securing the book/movie rights. Can i buy a Jpeg of the legal team ?
|
|
#
?
Dec 4, 2015 18:52
|
|
|
aleksendr posted:Oh no, far from me to stand defending CIG of delivering anything. That's part of the reason some think there's a rush to get SQ42 out the door, according to CIG they haven't delivered SQ42 yet and in the EU your rights to a full refund only expire once the final item is delivered (+14 days). They could say they've delivered Star Citizen right now, it wouldn't be true but there's nothing to stop them saying it.
|
|
#
?
Dec 4, 2015 18:54
|
|
|
Mirificus posted:Deep Karled? lmao
|
|
#
?
Dec 4, 2015 18:57
|
|
|
Wow- the spergs are more embarrassed and angry about last night's Game Awards Trailer fumble than I thought! It's almost like they realize this crap makes the game and its creator look dishonest and incompetent. And there's a surprising recognition that the gaming public at large is not like the loyal Star Citizenry-- they might actually see something very different when they watch a lousy hype trailer for an Alpha game that isn't even available to the majority of existing backers yet and realize "I can't even play that crap game yet even if I back it? WTF?!" It reminds me of that Ackroyd quote from Ghostbusters. "You don't know what it's like out there! I've worked in the private sector. They expect results." REDDIT: Ben Regarding Trailer Confusion Top rated comment: quote:Bribase 55 points 6 hours ago* quote:Bribase 15 points 5 hours ago quote:Combat_Wombatz 3 points 4 hours ago quote:Matilda2013 3 points 3 hours ago
|
|
#
?
Dec 4, 2015 18:57
|
|
|
No.. 2.0 is not a disappointment at all.. Quite the contrary.. It's my only hope.
|
|
#
?
Dec 4, 2015 18:58
|
|
|
MeLKoR posted:
I managed to get a few thousand people to play Eve Online, but I'm the exception rather than the rule. Also, I'm not doing SC referrals right now because It's not a game that's actually released and I don't want to take responsibility for differences in expectation vs reality.
|
|
#
?
Dec 4, 2015 18:59
|
|
ROCKET SCIENCE 
|
I think I'd be likely to pledge more money if I could request that my donations were to be earmarked for specific things. Like if I buy a Javelin I can request that the money be used to eradicate one bug from the PU, or pay for 1/200th of the next mocap studio, or buy one lunch for Lesnick, or pay for 38 minutes worth of croberts cocaine. What do you think Sandi? Can you make this happen?
|
|
#
?
Dec 4, 2015 19:19
|
|
|
illectro posted:I managed to get a few thousand people to play Eve Online How did you do this? I played Eve almost 10 years ago, didn't really understand what was going on. I still get the emails from them.
|
|
#
?
Dec 4, 2015 19:26
|
|
|
SpunkyRedKnight posted:You want a summary of a lawsuit that is yet to happen against a company making a game that has yet to be finished? You'll have to wait 2 weeks for that.
|
|
#
?
Dec 4, 2015 19:29
|
|
|
Illegal Username posted:Wait, what? There's going to be a internet spaceship lawsuit? There is definitely going to be a lawsuit. It's going to have all the features you've loved from other lawsuits, plus more! I'm not really at a point where I can talk specifics about it though, because we're still in the phase of fleshing it all out.
|
|
#
?
Dec 4, 2015 19:30
|
|
|
MeLKoR posted:
A Pyramid Module?
|
|
#
?
Dec 4, 2015 19:38
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 24, 2024 23:32 |
|
|
MilesK posted:What about all the false advertising for a feature complete game due out a year ago. I don't know much about the law, but I'd like to hear more about that than the technical details of floating points and rendering pipelines. Well, that's the crux of the matter, 'false advertising' as a criminal statute is different from 'false advertising' meaning I, as the injured party, was deceived. The former is an objective measurement, the latter is subjective. If they made direct claims that *any reasonable person* would consider false, it's criminal. In the civil case I'd have to prove injury. Smart doesn't have any skin in the game, so I'm still struggling for the grounds for any lawsuit. It could be that he's avoiding sub-judicie or prejudicing the case, but there's a fuckton of existing evidence that makes the whole thing difficult; You don't threaten lawsuits, you dump them and watch what happens next. Threatening lawsuits isn't nearly as good as an actual lawsuit because it's cheaper to launch than defend. aleksendr posted:Maybe not since the original part of the project funding, based on promises made at that time, is now unfulfilled and overdue by two years, still without a final delivery date. That's why people are looking at the ToS, it's the closest thing to a contract, or at the least a binding agreement. It's really weak, however. MeLKoR posted:If I pay you to build me a house and you promise to deliver in 2 years you don't get to keep my money indefinitely with the argument that "well you see after you paid me a bunch of other people gave me more money so I'd build a fully functioning Fallout Vault under your home and this will take several years more, you'll just have to be patient". If you donated the money to someone and didn't get a contract, it can be successfully argued that it's a 'gift' or 'pledge' to support the company in it's endeavors to supply the goods that people are paying for. Bear in mind that we still don't secure 100% prosecutions for people that receive 'gifts' from political allies, and that's actually loving illegal. AP posted:If you were going at this as misrepresentation of contract, false description of goods or contract inducement then the most likely outcome by far is rescission, basically a full refund. ^ This, but only on a civil complaint. Criminal complaints about false advertising usually end up in promises not to do it again with fines being bandied around. Illegal Username posted:Wait, what? There's going to be a internet spaceship lawsuit? Two weeks.
|
|
#
?
Dec 4, 2015 19:40
|
|
