|
Also it's illegal and punishable to file meritless law suits in the state of California. I'm sure Skadden knows this, and I seriously doubt they would've filed if they didn't think they could win. Of course "use CryEngine" is vague and who knows what the agreement says or escape hatches it has, but I'm unwilling to just dismiss this out of hand. Also an injunction is an interesting question. On the one hand they are currently distributing the supposedly breaching work. On the other hand the induction would severely limit CIG's ability to pay a potential suit and damage it's IP greatly, which neither side really wants (probably, since presumably Cry wants paid)
|
#
?
Dec 13, 2017 23:41
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 24, 2024 05:59 |
|
|
The backers really bought the angle that their vendors were working for free (because CIG refused to pay them).
|
|
#
?
Dec 13, 2017 23:42
|
|
|
Santa : "Ho ho hooo, now, who do we have here?" CR : "Hello um ah er, Snata, I'm Chris, I want a porsche, a limited edition one, a mansion in LA a......" Santa : "Ho ho hooo, now hold your horses young man, first we need to check where you are on my lists, have you been a good boy this year?" CR : "Hurrumpfff, Yes er Snata, um I've been good, all year, now back to um ah what I was originally demanding of you....." Santa : "Ho ho hooo, it says here that you are on the naughty list, are you sure you've been a good boy Chris?" CR : "Um ah, well, er, I promise that every penny goes into making the game, my word is as good as my bond, I'd never break a contract, especially not if there's really scary lawyers after me" Santa : "Now look here you greedy little bastard... they are coming for you!!"
|
|
#
?
Dec 13, 2017 23:42
|
|
|
https://twitter.com/commando_tom/status/941075946400112640
|
|
#
?
Dec 13, 2017 23:43
|
|
|
Rad Russian posted:We'll know more soon but as others haven mentioned they were hoping that either a) Crytek goes under or b) Their game comes out two weeks from now and generates $500 million in sales and they buy the rest of crytek with it. Neither has happened. That's the part where I call BS on the Warlord TBH I mean...sorry to doubt you, after you demonstrably called it Derek, but they had to have money to keep paying their staff somehow so I doubt they're quite entirely dry yet. But sure as gently caress, this lawsuit will make them so 
|
|
#
?
Dec 13, 2017 23:43
|
|
|
Bofast posted:So, if the "exclusively use CryEngine" part of the lawsuit is correct, they just admitted outright that they are in breach of contract? At this point it's just arguing about how they broke their contract. CIG's brilliant defense is that after they misused the engine and didn't fulfill their contractual obligations they dropped the engine completely, breaking the contract, and are now not subject to the contract? This is like TV Lawyering where Ortwin thinks he is going to call a surprise witness that completely wins the case just after the stunning closing monologue without the prosecution ever getting to speak.
|
|
#
?
Dec 13, 2017 23:44
|
|
|
I just love how royally hosed they are no matter what. They can't say they didn't switch engines because of all of the points they broke, but they can't say they switched either because that is ALSO breaking the contract.
|
|
#
?
Dec 13, 2017 23:44
|
|
|
On the twelve days of xmas my true love sent to me Members of the jury 1 - 12 up yours CIG
|
|
#
?
Dec 13, 2017 23:45
|
|
|
Hav posted:Seriously, the biggest part of this is the GLA that we're getting a glimpse into. They have _paper_, presumably signed, that indicated intent. A failure to follow through on that intent is a breach of contract, and that's pretty much the whole thing without the copyright claims, or the bad faith in negotiations. Once the contract was terminated in agreement by both parties then CIG would have been free to switch to whatever engine they wanted. Crazypoops posted:I just love how royally hosed they are no matter what. They can't say they didn't switch engines because of all of the points they broke, but they can't say they switched either because that is ALSO breaking the contract. EDIT: typos and grammar nnnotime fucked around with this message at 23:50 on Dec 13, 2017 |
|
#
?
Dec 13, 2017 23:45
|
|
|
lmao This is a great day
|
|
#
?
Dec 13, 2017 23:45
|
|
|
|
|
#
?
Dec 13, 2017 23:45
|
|
|
Crazypoops posted:I just love how royally hosed they are no matter what. They can't say they didn't switch engines because of all of the points they broke, but they can't say they switched either because that is ALSO breaking the contract. Either way, Coutt's "collateral" is now completely worthless. I mean it was always completely worthless, but now it's worthless in a way bankers can understand.
|
|
#
?
Dec 13, 2017 23:45
|
|
|
VictorianQueerLit posted:At this point it's just arguing about how they broke their contract. CIG's brilliant defense is that after they misused the engine and didn't fulfill their contractual obligations they dropped the engine completely, breaking the contract, and are now not subject to the contract? SHOCKING EVIDENCE Sandi has cell phone footage of Chris crossing his fingers when he signed the contract.
|
|
#
?
Dec 13, 2017 23:46
|
|
|
https://twitter.com/Evilopoly90/status/941070388146180096 https://twitter.com/conker87/status/941067158561443848 https://twitter.com/1114cole/status/941061672504119296
|
|
#
?
Dec 13, 2017 23:47
|
|
|
VictorianQueerLit posted:This is like TV Lawyering where Ortwin thinks he is going to call a surprise witness that completely wins the case just after the stunning closing monologue without the prosecution ever getting to speak. And it's himself.
|
|
#
?
Dec 13, 2017 23:48
|
|
|
Crazypoops posted:I just love how royally hosed they are no matter what. They can't say they didn't switch engines because of all of the points they broke, but they can't say they switched either because that is ALSO breaking the contract. And it's the same for Squadron 42 - they either say they were developing it in CryEngine and taking orders for it without having a license to do so, or they say they weren't developing it which means they were lying about working on it over a period of years whilst taking pre-orders for it. They're hosed from all angles.
|
|
#
?
Dec 13, 2017 23:48
|
|
|
The first Coutts is the deepest, baby, I know The first Coutts is the deepest But when it comes to being lucky, he's cursed When it comes to licencing engines, he's worse
|
|
#
?
Dec 13, 2017 23:48
|
|
|
Crazypoops posted:I just love how royally hosed they are no matter what. They can't say they didn't switch engines because of all of the points they broke, but they can't say they switched either because that is ALSO breaking the contract. SomethingJones posted:And it's the same for Squadron 42 - they either say they were developing it in CryEngine and taking orders for it without having a license to do so, or they say they weren't developing it which means they were lying about working on it over a period of years whilst taking pre-orders for it.  it's so good.
|
|
#
?
Dec 13, 2017 23:50
|
|
|
"months" somewhere in the neighborhood of 60 of 'em i would guess
|
|
#
?
Dec 13, 2017 23:50
|
|
|
https://twitter.com/jasonschreier/status/941069079187738625 It's like poetry, it rhymes
|
|
#
?
Dec 13, 2017 23:51
|
|
|
https://twitter.com/commando_tom/status/941077690408464384 https://twitter.com/commando_tom/status/941078208421748738
|
|
#
?
Dec 13, 2017 23:52
|
|
|
SomethingJones posted:Crytek licensed CryEngine at a cut down price to CIG as long as they used it to build Star Citizen and all of that was written into the contract and was broken so now it appears in the lawsuit. The only bit of the contract you need to see is included in the lawsuit, I don't know what else you need to see to determine its merit. The gravamen of this claim in the complaint appears to be these two paragraphs: 36. Section 2.1.2 of the GLA contained a critical promise from Defendants that they would not develop the Star Citizen video game using any other video game engines. 37. Section 2.1.2 of the GLA states that Defendants have a license only to "exclusively embed CryEngine in the Game." The selection of the agreement "exclusively embed CryEngine in the Game" may not necessarily mean that CIG had to use it for the "Game," just that they could only use it for the "Game." They don't quote enough to know if CryTek's characterization of the agreement is the only way it can be read. It could be an attempt at a cash grab using an "aggressive interpretation" of the agreement. That's all I'm saying.
|
|
#
?
Dec 13, 2017 23:52
|
|
|
Star citizen: and a co-oooo-ke hea-aaaad in Cell block B
|
|
#
?
Dec 13, 2017 23:52
|
|
|
To the newly registered Skadden lawyers dudes who just registered an SA account
|
|
#
?
Dec 13, 2017 23:53
|
|
|
Oh hey guys, anything new happen today?
|
|
#
?
Dec 13, 2017 23:53
|
|
|
https://twitter.com/commando_tom/status/941078715785777156
|
|
#
?
Dec 13, 2017 23:54
|
|
|
Toops posted:Oh hey guys, anything new happen today? Nah, not really
|
|
#
?
Dec 13, 2017 23:54
|
|
|
Toops posted:Oh hey guys, anything new happen today? Nah. Not “new”… as such.
|
|
#
?
Dec 13, 2017 23:54
|
|
|
Star citizen : strangeways here we come.
|
|
#
?
Dec 13, 2017 23:54
|
|
|
Now I understand why Miles Eckhart isn't in the game.
|
|
#
?
Dec 13, 2017 23:54
|
|
C-Bangin' it 
|
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8EC4WHPxnrk&t=246s
|
|
#
?
Dec 13, 2017 23:55
|
|
|
Disappointed that none of the articles contain the words "Derek Smart was right" or "goons" tbh
|
|
#
?
Dec 13, 2017 23:55
|
|
|
Skadden: "I'm going to get right to the point. It has come to my attention that you and the studio changed the development from CryEngine to Lumberyard. Is that correct?" Crobbler: "Who said that?" Skadden: "You did." Crobbler: (pauses for a few seconds) "Was that wrong? Should I have not done that? I tell you, I gotta plead ignorance on this thing because if anyone had said anything to me at all when I first agreed with Crytek that that sort of thing was frowned upon, you know, ‘cause I've worked in a lot of studios and I tell you people do that all the time."
|
|
#
?
Dec 13, 2017 23:55
|
|
|
Nicholas posted:"We are aware of the Crytek complaint having been filed in the US District Court. CIG hasn’t used the CryEngine for quite some time since we switched to Amazon’s Lumberyard. This is a meritless lawsuit that we will defend vigorously against, including recovering from Crytek any costs incurred in this matter." Yes I know. But you must admit the case if a bit more ambiguous than if they had switched, say, to Unreal 4. Because LY still technically is CE. So is LY another, completely different engine, or is it a new branch of CE that is marketed/owned by a different company ? I do not have the answer and I certainly do not think it's an easy black & white answer.
|
|
#
?
Dec 13, 2017 23:55
|
|
|
Relax, it's still alpha. That beta lawsuit though...
|
|
#
?
Dec 13, 2017 23:56
|
|
|
Let me coutts the way CIG is screwed. 1)Media will have a hayday 2)Backer confidence will be shaken 3)Interim injunction to stop the project is possible 4)Coutts loan called in 5)Lawsuit goes through and judgment entered against CIG
|
|
#
?
Dec 13, 2017 23:56
|
|
|
Nyast posted:I do not have the answer and I certainly do not think it's an easy black & white answer. Is it funny? Yes There is your black and white answer commando
|
|
#
?
Dec 13, 2017 23:57
|
|
|
MinorInconvenience posted:The gravamen of this claim in the complaint appears to be these two paragraphs: Well if that's their defence then they really are truly hosed because a jury ain't buying that load of old cobblers in ten million years. edit - the word "exclusively" is explicit and easily understood. SomethingJones fucked around with this message at 00:00 on Dec 14, 2017 |
|
#
?
Dec 13, 2017 23:57
|
|
|
Actually I believe you'll find that there's no such thing as bad publicity.
|
|
#
?
Dec 13, 2017 23:58
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 24, 2024 05:59 |
|
|
Oh for the love of god, will you guys stop posting? I. Just. Can't.Keep.Up. Please? Pretty Please?
|
|
#
?
Dec 13, 2017 23:59
|
|
