|
  
|
#
?
Jan 6, 2018 23:47
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 1, 2024 05:12 |
|
|
Dusty Lens posted:This lawsuit is like going to a wrestling match that you've been waiting all year to see but then you find out that someone might be parachuting a bear into the ring so now you're ultra hyped but if it doesn't work out you still get your original fun.
|
|
#
?
Jan 6, 2018 23:48
|
|
|
Seems like Crytek got CIG to sign a pretty badly written contract and it looks like CIG could end up winning this in court. I mean, who loving writes a contract that says there can't be any damages as long as the other party says "oops, sorry, we didn't realise it would be a problem".
|
|
#
?
Jan 6, 2018 23:49
|
|
|
Chalks posted:Seems like Crytek got CIG to sign a pretty badly written contract and it looks like CIG could end up winning this in court. the guy who is leaving to go join the other company
|
|
#
?
Jan 6, 2018 23:52
|
|
|
https://twitter.com/listening2day/status/949741781972742144
|
|
#
?
Jan 6, 2018 23:54
|
|
|
The Titanic posted:Whoever this guy is, is right. I was up all night crying into my pillow over this. like any self-respecting goon, I was too busy rubbing to be upset
|
|
#
?
Jan 6, 2018 23:56
|
|
|
big nipples big life posted:the guy who is leaving to go join the other company "I'm dumb" as a solid defence against breach of contract. Good job Ortwin, it's the perfect fit. The best part is that if this goes to court, it will literally come down to a question of whether the jury believes CIG are genuinely idiots. In entertainment terms, I'm looking forward to this one.
|
|
#
?
Jan 6, 2018 23:56
|
|
|
Chalks posted:Seems like Crytek got CIG to sign a pretty badly written contract and it looks like CIG could end up winning this in court. I'm pretty sure the no-damages clause is the standard warranty stuff in all software licenses. IE, "If our library causes a nuclear meltdown because 1 + 1 doesn't equal 3 you can't sue us", not a general, "Neither party can ever sue either party for damages ever for any raisin. ~Ortwin Fre..Frier...gently caress-you-mouth, Esq."
|
|
#
?
Jan 6, 2018 23:57
|
|
|
The Titanic posted:Memes age with time like fine wine. Referencing a meme probably over 15 years old gives the post distinction. Stay frosty commando.
|
|
#
?
Jan 7, 2018 00:18
|
|
|
Scruffpuff posted:So again MoMA was wrong when he implied that Derek was just telling who he thought the defense would be, when in fact he knew for some time. A goon detective hits a homerun again. WAAAZZZZZAAAAA Ben ?
|
|
#
?
Jan 7, 2018 00:20
|
|
|
Having returned from my travels in Americaland, I am just starting to catch up on the thread and I'm glad to see that CIG have hired a comedy lawyer for us.
|
|
#
?
Jan 7, 2018 00:26
|
|
|
|
|
#
?
Jan 7, 2018 00:26
|
|
|
Scruffpuff posted:So again MoMA was wrong when he implied that Derek was just telling who he thought the defense would be, when in fact he knew for some time. MoMA's posts are intended purely for backers reading the thread, as damage control. Always were.
|
|
#
?
Jan 7, 2018 00:29
|
|
|
There we go.
|
|
#
?
Jan 7, 2018 00:29
|
|
|
Bootcha posted:What we saw was essentially bluff calling. The way I see it CIG have shown a defence which means that there is now a dispute and therefore a case, and it's on its way to space court.
|
|
#
?
Jan 7, 2018 00:31
|
|
|
Ironically, those pledges are to RSI, not CIG. Smug cultist got the wrong company. 
|
|
#
?
Jan 7, 2018 00:32
|
|
|
SomethingJones posted:The way I see it CIG have shown a defence which means that there is now a dispute and therefore a case, and it's on its way to space court. Yeah I can't see this being dismissed with prejudice on either side. We goin' to space court.
|
|
#
?
Jan 7, 2018 00:36
|
|
|
I don't know why Chris is worried about this. If he is jailed, he can always jitter noclip through the bars to freedom. SPACE COURT
|
|
#
?
Jan 7, 2018 00:45
|
|
|
happyhippy posted:I don't know why Chris is worried about this. You spelled Space Coutts wrong. 
|
|
#
?
Jan 7, 2018 00:47
|
|
|
He's saying he wants all of the RSI forum subscribers to be personally liable for any charges should the case be ruled in Crytek's favor?
|
|
#
?
Jan 7, 2018 00:50
|
|
|
The Saddest Robot posted:He's saying he wants all of the RSI forum subscribers to be personally liable for any charges should the case be ruled in Crytek's favor? That's a lot of pressure to put on my forum alts.
|
|
#
?
Jan 7, 2018 00:52
|
|
|
The Saddest Robot posted:He's saying he wants all of the RSI forum subscribers to be personally liable for any charges should the case be ruled in Crytek's favor? lol, silly goonie, the fire and fury of FKKS is #ortwinning
|
|
#
?
Jan 7, 2018 00:54
|
|
|
Has anyone said #ortwhining yet?
|
|
#
?
Jan 7, 2018 00:59
|
|
|
https://www.twitch.tv/videos/216063404?t=03h47m17s
|
|
#
?
Jan 7, 2018 01:05
|
|
|
A bunch of marketing vacancies and what appears to be Money's job went up on Jan 2nd Public Relations and Social Media Director Los Angeles, CA Posted: January 02, 2018 e: is this who I think it is, is this Swofford? Creative Brand Manager Los Angeles, CA Posted: January 02, 2018 Sales Strategist Los Angeles, CA Senior Video Producer, GVP Los Angeles, CA These are new vacancies, they've also refreshed a couple of older ones to keep them on the front page.
|
|
#
?
Jan 7, 2018 01:08
|
|
|
thatguy posted:If any of you guys get upset if Crytek loses then you're playing the game wrong. Whoever wins the laffs will flow eternally
|
|
#
?
Jan 7, 2018 01:12
|
|
|
The Titanic posted:Memes age with time like fine wine. Referencing a meme probably over 15 years old gives the post distinction. Over 9000? I haven’t heard that meme in years.
|
|
#
?
Jan 7, 2018 01:13
|
|
|
neonbregna posted:Over 9000? I haven’t heard that meme in years. 9000 ?!
|
|
#
?
Jan 7, 2018 01:16
|
|
|
neonbregna posted:Over 9000? That's a thumb I haven't heard in years
|
|
#
?
Jan 7, 2018 01:16
|
|
|
MedicineHut posted:https://twitter.com/SC_Logicorp/status/949667077991882753 That guy is a total and utter idiot. That's a crazy and very damning thing he just posted there, that right there is why Squadron 42 could never have been sold as a separate title. That right there is one of the many reasons I think that Derek has been right about the money all along because that's the desperation kicking in. Squadron 42 was defined as a feature of the main title and it explicitly says it was not to be sold separately. CIG have breached their contract all over the place and the evidence is all in the public domain.
|
|
#
?
Jan 7, 2018 01:17
|
|
|
The Rubbening
|
|
#
?
Jan 7, 2018 01:20
|
|
|
People of California, I rest my case, then case dismissed?
|
|
#
?
Jan 7, 2018 01:21
|
|
|
i am glad of the upcoming trial battles and legal wars. it gives the thread more fat to chew if Cryteck lose, it means Star Citizen is good and fun!!!
|
|
#
?
Jan 7, 2018 01:22
|
|
|
PrimeNerd posted:I'm pretty sure the no-damages clause is the standard warranty stuff in all software licenses. IE, "If our library causes a nuclear meltdown because 1 + 1 doesn't equal 3 you can't sue us", not a general, "Neither party can ever sue either party for damages ever for any raisin. ~Ortwin Fre..Frier...gently caress-you-mouth, Esq." I was a bit puzzled by this while preparing my April Blog post, but I think I've gathered what it is; I don't think the clause in question isn't a limitation of contractual liability, judging from the location of the clause and the 'indemnification disclaimer' comment at the start of it, I'm pretty sure that the whole clause refers to CIG not being liable to indemnify Crytek for breaches of contract/tortious actions and vice versa. In other words, this is basically to protect CIG/Crytek from the other acting like an idiot and pissing off a third party and has no business being applied to this contract.
|
|
#
?
Jan 7, 2018 01:23
|
|
|
Beet Wagon posted:that chatroll was hilarious lol Kayak building a space doggy door confirmed.
|
|
#
?
Jan 7, 2018 01:36
|
|
|
D_Smart posted:Yeah, the motion is going to fail on merits alone. And if they bungled it enough, they basically gave Skadden a huge opening for their injunction to succeed. So, GLA = ELE?
|
|
#
?
Jan 7, 2018 01:36
|
|
|
Now look, Roberts. A guy takes out an accident policy that's worth $10,000,000 if it's killed mid development. Then, two weeks later, it *is* killed mid development. And, not from being unable to deliver mind you, but loving up some silly standard contract. You know what the mathematical probability of that is? One out of, oh, I don't know how many billions. And after that, the broken jesus patch. No, it just, it just can't be the way it looks. Something has been worked on us!
|
|
#
?
Jan 7, 2018 01:47
|
|
|
The best part of all this is that it does not matter if the Crobber and Tickler dream team come out on top in any legal battle. There was already good reason to think their financial situation was shaky, and Star Citizen is still a gigantic fuckshow that's never going to meet the insane expectations.
|
|
#
?
Jan 7, 2018 01:48
|
|
|
2.8.1 in the Declaration of Jeremy S. Goldman (the GLA):quote:...shall include the following wording: "Poertions of this software are included under licence © 2004-201_ Crytek GmbH..." So it's hinted in the GLA that Star Citizen will release before 2020 ;o) Edit: Posting from 8 pages back... Seems like our Warlord was right about the defending law firm (sorry if this has been mentioned several times before).
|
|
#
?
Jan 7, 2018 01:49
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 1, 2024 05:12 |
|
|
Confused: https://twitter.com/dsmart/status/949800932115648515 Does this mean the maximum damages Skadden can get out of this is 1.85 €MM irrespective? Or does the "intentional" element allow to break that barrier and sky is the limit?
|
|
#
?
Jan 7, 2018 02:02
|
|
