Star Citizen: Death of a Space Thread?

The Something Awful Forums > Archives > Comedy Goldmine > The Goodmine > Star Citizen: Death of a Space Thread?

Bofast: Feb 21, 2011; Grimey Drawer

AbstractNapper posted:

So the judge is still open to deny the MTD claims that she granted here, if Crytek comed up with a stronger ammendment in the next month and CIG's counter argument to that is not convincing enough.

The wheels are in MOTION.
Lol

Altering the claims to be that CIG breached 2.4 if they switched to Lumberyard, rather than 2.1.2, would seem to be a start if CryTek wanted to amend their complaint.

# ? Aug 15, 2018 13:35

Adbot: ADBOT LOVES YOU

# ? May 31, 2024 15:54

Alchenar: Apr 9, 2008

Zaphod42 posted:

I strongly disagree.

Here's the original pitch

Doing all that, also doing single player and an mmo and real-time ship combat with physics and everything having extreme detail which is anathema to MMO design as we know it.. all of that for $500,000.

These are exactly the things you shouldn't be promising about your MMO that you haven't built yet. How does he know that level of graphical fidelity is going to run at reasonable performance at huge scales and with large numbers of players? He doesn't.

No loving way. No. loving. Way.

So then they get more money, and they go and promise more features. They were always underwater, unable to complete the game promised with the money raised. And to raise more money to finish the things promised, they promise more things, but those things just cost more to complete.

In this way, it basically is a ponzi scheme. Its a ponzi scheme of dreams and promises and lies and hopes.

Also its fun watching the original pitch video again, Chris has no idea what to do with his hands and just waves them on every syllable he says https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VhsgiliheP0

I was always skeptical because:

a) Chris Roberts? The guy who last made a game over ten years ago and was forced out of the project because he ran over time and budget and Microsoft had to salvage the pieces of his poor project management? The guy who is now promising to make the same game again but bigger and without any checks on making the exact same mistakes?

It was always obvious how that story was going to go and the hero worship for him was unbelievable.

b) Simultaneously David Braben is pitching a very similar game but with a less ambitious scope for twice the money, but Frontier Developments exists as a studio and they've been making games non-stop and they have a game engine they've built themselves specifically to do this space game.

Compare and contrast what Braben and Roberts were promising, based on their respective starting points. It was always obvious that if you thought Braben was making a sensible pitch then Roberts had to be selling snake oil.

e: it was actually funny watching Goons get super worked up in the original thread with spreadsheets of ships owned and dreams of recreating Goonfleet-in-SC (ignoring the 100% likelihood of goon drama) abandoning that thread, then checking back after a couple of years to find how opinion had shifted.

Alchenar fucked around with this message at 13:40 on Aug 15, 2018

# ? Aug 15, 2018 13:35

Tokamak: Dec 22, 2004

Indeed

# ? Aug 15, 2018 13:38

Bofast: Feb 21, 2011; Grimey Drawer

SpaceSDoorGunner posted:

The legal argument is still in pre-alpha how about you chill out and be patient. In the meantime play some star citizen, it's a totally and complete game but you encounter any bugs or find that there's no real content or actual simulation whatsoever, please remember it's still in pre-alpha.

Star Citizen - tier 0 implementation of the hot legal action

# ? Aug 15, 2018 13:39

Tippis: Mar 21, 2008; It's yet another day in the wasteland.

Tsed posted:

Hey now, Discovery retired intact :p

Ehrm� I mean� Minor detail.

# ? Aug 15, 2018 13:47

DapperDon: Sep 7, 2016

TheSickeningTruth posted:

Seriously guys, just because we can hide our wee-wee stick between our thighs doesn't mean we can turn into females at will.

(USER WAS PUT ON PROBATION FOR THIS POST)

Jesus Tapdancing Christ.....This comment as a standalone is just loving hysterical.

# ? Aug 15, 2018 14:01

Bayonnefrog: Nov 9, 2017

MedicineHut posted:

CONCLUSION
In light of the foregoing, the Court GRANTS in part and DENIES in part the MTD as follows:

1. The MTD is DENIED insofar as it seeks dismissal of all causes of action alleged against Defendant RSI;

2. The MTD is GRANTED insofar as it seeks dismissal of the aspect of Plaintiff�s cause of action for breach that is based on section 2.1.2�s �exclusive� grant to embed CryEngine in the Game;

3. The MTD is DENIED insofar as the request to dismiss the cause of action for breach of contract is premised on California Civil Code section 1655�s implied condition and on section 6.1.4 of the GLA, and insofar as Plaintiff�s claim for breach is predicated on CryEngine�s allegedly unauthorized use in Squadron 42;

4. The MTD is DENIED with respect to Plaintiff�s cause of action for copyright infringement;

5. The MTD�s request that the Court dismiss Plaintiff�s prayers for relief is DENIED with respect to monetary damages, injunctive relief, and statutory damages and attorney�s fees, and GRANTED with respect to punitive damages;

6. The MTD�s alternative request that the Court strike allegations in paragraph 15 of the FAC is DENIED.

Crytek is granted leave to file an amended complaint that cures the deficiencies discussed in this Order, or alert Defendants and the Court of its intent not to file an amended pleading, within 21 days from the date of this Order. Defendants shall file their response within 21 days from the filing and service of the amended complaint. The Court will schedule a Rule 16 Scheduling Conference once the pleadings are finalized.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

ok this makes it a lot less interesting for me.

No punitive damages. So what's the most they can get out of them now? Whatever the deal was for it was like 300k or something. Boring.

# ? Aug 15, 2018 14:02

G0RF: Mar 19, 2015; Some galactic defender you are, Space Cadet.

By the power invested in me by the absolute state of Space Court, I hearby summon MoMA.

IT IS SO ORDERED that you appear before the Space Court and submit your amended :smuggo:

MOTION TO DISS.

IT IS ALSO DETERMINED that Charlie Hall file a briefing before the Space Court that buries the lede PURSAUNT to the terms outlined in the ~~RSI~~ CIG/Vox LICENSE TO SHILL contract, as per Addendumb 4 attached to this ruling.

G0RF fucked around with this message at 14:07 on Aug 15, 2018

# ? Aug 15, 2018 14:03

Bayonnefrog: Nov 9, 2017

Agony Aunt posted:

I wonder how Montoya is going to spin this as being good for CIG....

No need to spin.

The MTD was granted on two of the biggest points: the "exclusive" argument that Crytek was making PLUS no punitive damages.

That takes a lot of the sting away. So now Crytek will have to in on the copyright argument and at most will just get $$ for what the original deal was for which big picture isn't that much? Can someone post it? Win for CIG I would say

# ? Aug 15, 2018 14:05

Bayonnefrog: Nov 9, 2017

ahmini posted:

The exclusivity thing and punitive damages were two of the main threats to CIG's existence. They've won on those fronts so the most serious thing that comes out of this is that CIG can't release SQ42 as a separate game, which doesn't seem to be a problem right now as SQ42 doesn't exist in any meaningful sense anyway.

I would say that although most of the MTD was denied, enough significant areas were granted to call it a draw at this point unless Crytek come back with amendments to counter the dismissed points.

Yup my thoughts as well. No punitive no exclusive. Crytek will have to come up with something creative to overturn those two.

# ? Aug 15, 2018 14:06

tuo: Jun 17, 2016

"IT IS SO ORDERED" is how a true Lesnick challenge starts

# ? Aug 15, 2018 14:07

Bayonnefrog: Nov 9, 2017

Tinfoil Papercut posted:

So the old "why are you suing us?" defense didn't work?

Correct. Which even us non lawyer types knew wouldn't work. There is enough here for Crytek to have it's day in court. Even with the two granted MTD they'll be arguing the copyright angle for the original contract $$'s

Bayonnefrog fucked around with this message at 14:10 on Aug 15, 2018

# ? Aug 15, 2018 14:08

Agony Aunt: Apr 17, 2018; by LITERALLY AN ADMIN

Hav posted:

Well, generally the class actions get funneled into arbitration now, so that might be difficult; there aren�t a lot of success stories around legalities where the crowdfunding money happens, but there�s always a fun chance that Crytek win and establish some facts about what is actually happening. The original complaint is worth reading just to see how Crytek justified each claim; they used CiG and RSI�s own words against them, which is always a solid lane of attack. I mean, they literally reference Chris saying things in videos.

We may not see discovery, btw, but someone will. I�ll dump the list of what Skadden�s were after later. It�s hilarious in scope and how prepared they were.

I think people are missing a trick in terms of what the original pitch claimed was �the delivered game�, because that included �100 systems� as a material fact. Worth bearing in mind for the �they�ve effectively released a game� claim.

Edit: Now if you�re like a ex-paleo troll from the early days of usenet and have giant brassy bollocks, now might the be the time to crowdfund a modest �documentary� on the case itself. I�ll take suggestions on the best smilie to end that sentence with.

If it goes to trial as well, then someone from CIG, possibly Chris or Ortwin, might have to go under oath and answer the judge's questions.

I'm hoping its Chris, because the transcript is going to be hilarious if so.....

Judge: So Mr. Roberts, and i'd like to remind you that you are under oath, please explain to me in your own words what is Star Citizen?
Chris: *starts furiously handwaving* Well, ummm, its this massive scope game with high fidelity and fidelity and so many things you can do, and ships, ummm, lots of ships, and top tier actors... no, wait, that's the other game, i mean fidelity, and polygons.....
Judge: Mr. Roberts, please, just answer the question. This is important so we can define exactly what is the product.
Chris: *more handwaving* Well, as i was saying... fidelity.
Judge: If you say fidelity one more time i'll find you in contempt of court!
Chris: Fidelity!

# ? Aug 15, 2018 14:11

MedicineHut: Feb 25, 2016

Bayonnefrog posted:

ok this makes it a lot less interesting for me.

No punitive damages. So what's the most they can get out of them now? Whatever the deal was for it was like 300k or something. Boring.

We can also safely asume Crobblers will absolve himself of that anyways.

Check mate. Case closed. Quid pro quo. Quo vadis. Qui hoc legit, stultus es.

# ? Aug 15, 2018 14:12

Golli: Jan 5, 2013

Injunctive relief is still on the table, though.

That could sting.

# ? Aug 15, 2018 14:12

Jobbo_Fett: Mar 7, 2014; Slava Ukrayini; Clapping Larry

tuo posted:

"IT IS SO ORDERED" is how a true Lesnick challenge starts

I ain't doing that poo poo again. I died and became a ghost because of that challenge.

# ? Aug 15, 2018 14:13

Agony Aunt: Apr 17, 2018; by LITERALLY AN ADMIN

Bayonnefrog posted:

Correct. Which even us non lawyer types knew wouldn't work. There is enough here for Crytek to have it's day in court. Even with the two granted MTD they'll be arguing the copyright angle for the original contract $$'s

And, if SQ42 turns out to be not covered by the original GLA and it shown CIG used CryEngine to develop it before the switch to Lumberyard, then CryTek could probably push for some damages there and slap a price on it all, possibly linking it to eventual copies sold or pre-ordered.

If CIG try to claim they never wrote a line of code for SQ42 with CryEngine, then that would signal they have lied to backers for years.

# ? Aug 15, 2018 14:14

Colostomy Bag: Jan 11, 2016; C-Bangin' it

wtf

# ? Aug 15, 2018 14:18

Jobbo_Fett: Mar 7, 2014; Slava Ukrayini; Clapping Larry

Colostomy Bag posted:

wtf

lmao

# ? Aug 15, 2018 14:21

Virtual Captain: Feb 20, 2017; Archive Priest of the Stimperial Order

Star Citizen Good, in all things forevermore. Amen.

posted:

We can only hope the lawyers involved on both sides are fans and end up spending at least some of their disposable income back on ships.

# ? Aug 15, 2018 14:22

Tippis: Mar 21, 2008; It's yet another day in the wasteland.

Colostomy Bag posted:

wtf

You'd think that the lawyers on both sides, having seen the whole mess, would be the ones least likely to buy anything from anyone related with this project.

# ? Aug 15, 2018 14:24

G0RF: Mar 19, 2015; Some galactic defender you are, Space Cadet.

Colostomy Bag posted:

wtf

Well the Judge Gee daughter-of-NASA connection didn�t seem to help much.

Maybe in Space Court people handle these things like adults?

# ? Aug 15, 2018 14:25

shrach: Jan 10, 2004; daylight ssssaving time

D_Smart posted:

Have you ever come across the term, context?

OK, how about this. Do you know what it means when:

- game is exclusive to a console?
- breaking news story is exclusive to a media station|paper?
- bundle in a store (e.g. Walmart) is exclusive to the store?
- piece of middleware is bundled exclusively in an engine?
- license (e.g. Lumberyard) allows you to exclusively use their tech (e.g. AWS) and no competing ones?

So no, exclusives are not suddenly new because some people choose to interpret an otherwise ambiguous use of the term in disputed contract.

D_Smart posted:

Are you serious? Is this the first time you are hearing the use of the word "exclusive" and what it implies in the business world?

To wit: Why on Earth do you think Amazon has so many restrictions in their Lumberyard engine which they CLEARLY STATE you should use AWS EXCLUSIVELY (if you use any cloud services in your game) and NO OTHER COMPLETING CLOUD PLATFORM? Which is why CIG switched from Google Computer to AWS in order to be able to use Lumberyard.

"laffo:

D_Smart posted:

You're an idiot.

There's many more examples but I can exclusively reveal that despite his hubris this guy was not right on this occasion.

# ? Aug 15, 2018 14:31

Tokyo Sexwale: Jul 30, 2003

But I don't understand... I thought everyone important even marginally peripherally involved was a fan of Wing Commander and dedicated to giving Chris as much of a free ride as possible!

# ? Aug 15, 2018 14:31

Hav: Dec 11, 2009; Fun Shoe

Agony Aunt posted:

If it goes to trial as well, then someone from CIG, possibly Chris or Ortwin, might have to go under oath and answer the judge's questions.

I'm hoping its Chris, because the transcript is going to be hilarious if so.....

Judge: So Mr. Roberts, and i'd like to remind you that you are under oath, please explain to me in your own words what is Star Citizen?
Chris: *starts furiously handwaving* Well, ummm, its this massive scope game with high fidelity and fidelity and so many things you can do, and ships, ummm, lots of ships, and top tier actors... no, wait, that's the other game, i mean fidelity, and polygons.....
Judge: Mr. Roberts, please, just answer the question. This is important so we can define exactly what is the product.
Chris: *more handwaving* Well, as i was saying... fidelity.
Judge: If you say fidelity one more time i'll find you in contempt of court!
Chris: Fidelity!

quote:

Chris Roberts: I have a very strong vision for Star Citizen, which is why I believe we have been backed to the level we have. I have no doubt what we can achieve. Now that most of the base technology is in place we will be able to get with the Large World and MultiCrew milestone a game experience that will allow you to seamlessly go from foot, to boarding a fully realized spaceship with your friends, take off, fly thousands or millions of km in space, exit your ship in EVA and explore derelict space stations or wrecks, engage in FPS combat, return to your ship, engage in space combat and return to your home base to share the tales of your adventures with your other friends. All with no leading screens, all at AAA first person fidelity that you can�t even get on a next gen console. This is the core of the Squadron 42 and Star Citizen experience that we will continue to iterate on and add content to, but even the first release will be more �game� than most commercially released space games. In terms of not listening to the advice of people that have worked in the industry that is not true. I have a very strong executive management and design team with huge experience in AAA titles that all contribute to the decision making of the company. I listen to everyone � from our top level all the way through to our QA testers and community giving feedback on gameplay and features. I care and want to build the best game possible. Now that doesn�t mean I agree with everyone�s opinions and feedback as a project director I owe it to the community to stay true to my vision and pick the things that I think will make the game better which can occasionally lead to people feeling disgruntled, which I suspect is the root of this �concern�.

Skadden: Sir, the question was, 'Is this your signature?'

# ? Aug 15, 2018 14:32

Hav: Dec 11, 2009; Fun Shoe

shrach posted:

There's many more examples but I can exclusively reveal that despite his hubris this guy was not right on this occasion.

Well, obviously once the wave-function collapses, you can fix state. You don't completely understand quantum Derek mechanics.

Imagine four balls on the edge of a cliff...

# ? Aug 15, 2018 14:34

Sample_text: Apr 28, 2018; by VideoGames

We can't just turn into females by tucking our wee wee's between our legs....

... that's only coming in Alpha 3.5

I'm just joking!

It's not coming in Alpha 3.5

# ? Aug 15, 2018 14:35

Colostomy Bag: Jan 11, 2016; C-Bangin' it

Frankly, in the name of fidelity, it would not surprise me if Roberts had discussions with his team on how to model a space dong.

# ? Aug 15, 2018 14:37

Golli: Jan 5, 2013

Colostomy Bag posted:

Frankly, in the name of fidelity, it would not surprise me if Roberts had discussions with his team on how to model a space dong.

Given all the problems they've had with retractable landing gear, tuckable dongs should be a hoot!

# ? Aug 15, 2018 14:44

Hav: Dec 11, 2009; Fun Shoe

Colostomy Bag posted:

Frankly, in the name of fidelity, it would not surprise me if Roberts had discussions with his team on how to model a space dong.

"Some sort of slider is popular these days I hear"

# ? Aug 15, 2018 14:45

TheAgent: Feb 16, 2002; The call is coming from inside Dr. House; Grimey Drawer

looks like they can still have CIG strip all code relating to CryEngine if its determined they are currently using it

wonder how skadden will deal with the punitive and exclusivity responses

# ? Aug 15, 2018 14:46

Hav: Dec 11, 2009; Fun Shoe

TheAgent posted:

looks like they can still have CIG strip all code relating to CryEngine if its determined they are currently using it

wonder how skadden will deal with the punitive and exclusivity responses

Trying to show an intent to profit by their actions, possibly. If you can prove that you intended to profit from the breach in the UK, it passes the bar for exemplary damages. I have a theory pulled entirely from my rear end that Roberts expected Crytek to go under and leave them free and clear, and once they got that Turkish cash, it changed the whole dynamic of trouser ownership.

Exclusivity is probably on the expectation of an ongoing relationship.

I think people are overlooking the whole 'legal costs' angle here, however. That keeps me grinning.

as threatened;

quote:

1) All COMMUNICATIONS between CRYTEK and DEFENDANTS, whether by e-mail, private messaging, or forum posts, exchange of media, or file transfer protocol, and all DOCUMENTS incorporating or referencing those COMMUNICATIONS, including but not limited to e-mail chains forwarding those COMMUNICATIONS in whole or in part or commenting on those COMMUNICATIONS.

2) To the extent not requested by the prior requests contained herein, all COMMUNICATIONS between Chris Roberts and Ortwin Freyermuth CONCERNING the PRODUCTS, any game engine including but not limited to CRYENGINE, or the formation of DEFENDANTS.

3) To the extent not requested by the prior requests contained herein, all DOCUMENTS and COMMUNICATIONS that refer to any game engine including but not limited to CRYENGINE.

4) All direct and indirect contracts and agreements between DEFENDANTS and Chris Roberts.

5) All direct and indirect contracts and agreements between DEFENDANTS and Ortwin Freyermuth.

6) All versions of source code, object code, or software associated with the PRODUCTS, including but not limited to versions contained in electronic work directories, shared drives, common directories, or libraries.

7) To the extent not requested by the prior requests contained herein, all DOCUMENTS that originated at CRYTEK, or are derived from DOCUMENTS that originated at CRYTEK, including by way of example CRYENGINE.

8) To the extent not requested by the prior requests contained herein, all DOCUMENTS CONCERNING any representations made by DEFENDANTS to any party regarding ownership of intellectual property in the PRODUCTS.

9) All DOCUMENTS or COMMUNICATIONS CONCERNING the Game License Agreement dated November 20, 2012, including but not limited to the Game License Agreement itself and any exhibits or amendments thereto.

10) All DOCUMENTS or COMMUNICATIONS CONCERNING the Licensing Terms Sheet dated October 6, 2012, including but not limited to the Licensing Terms Sheet itself.

11) To the extent not requested by the prior requests contained therein, all contracts or agreements between the DEFENDANTS and CRYTEK and all DOCUMENTS or COMMUNICATIONS CONCERNING those contracts or agreements.

12) All DOCUMENTS or COMMUNICATIONS CONCERNING requests for technology, source code, object code, software, animations, images, advice, information, or assistance from CRYTEK or its current or former employees, including but not limited to all COMMUNICATIONS from CRYTEK responding to any such requests.

13) All DOCUMENTS sufficient to identify and reflect the organizational structure of DEFENDANTS, including but not limited to company directories, and 4 the identification of corporate and/or business departments, whether formally or informally delineated, total number of employees, and each employee's title, job description, and reporting chain.

14) All DOCUMENTS or COMMUNICATIONS CONCERNING the corporate structure and relationship between and among
Cloud Imperium Games Corp.;
Roberts Space Industries Corp.;
Cloud Imperium Games, LLC;
Cloud Imperium LLC;
Cloud Imperium Rights, LLC,
Roberts Space Industries LLC,
Cloud Imperium Services, LLC,
Cloud Imperium Games Texas LLC,
Cloud Imperium Games UK Limited,
Cloud Imperium Rights LLC,
Foundry 42 Limited,
Gemini 42 Entertainment LLC,
Gemini 42 Productions, LLC,
Roberts Space Industries International Ltd., and
Twin Bros. GmbH, including but not limited to organizational charts.

15) All DOCUMENTS CONCERNING meetings of the board of directors, executives, or management team of DEFENDANTS at which CRYENGINE, CRYTEK, or CRYTEK's current or former employees were discussed.

16) All DOCUMENTS CONCERNING the ownership of the DEFENDANTS, including lists of past and present shareholders and their respective interests.

17) To the extent not requested by the prior requests contained herein, all DOCUMENTS CONCERNING the ownership interest of Chris Roberts in DEFENDANTS.

18) To the extent not requested by the prior requests contained herein, all DOCUMENTS CONCERNING the ownership interest of Ortwin Freyermuth in DEFENDANTS.

19) All COMMUNICATIONS CONCERNING (i) CRYTEK or (ii) any game engine including but not limited to CRYENGINE, between DEFENDANTS and any PERSONS or entities that have made any financial contribution (whether or not in exchange for any consideration) to support the development of the PRODUCTS.

20) A forensic copy of all past and present versions of DEFENDANTS' websites, including but not limited to https://www.cloudimperiumgames.com and https://www.robertsspaceindustries.com.

21) DOCUMENTS sufficient to identify the funds, contributions, or support provided to DEFENDANTS by any PERSONS or entities.

22) All DOCUMENTS CONCERNING the PRODUCTS that have been or are available online, including but not limited to video clips and uncut and original versions of video clips posted on DEFENDANTS' YouTube, Twitch, Twitter, Facebook, or other social media websites and applications.

23) To the extent not requested by the prior requests contained herein, all uncut and original versions of video clips that have been or are available online, including but not limited to the uncut and original version of the video clip available online at https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2Piy-ibiq1M.

24) To the extent not requested by the prior requests contained herein, all DOCUMENTS and COMMUNICATIONS CONCERNING the Star Citizen Kickstarter project located at https://www.kickstarter.cormn/projects/cig/star-citizen, or any other crowdfunding project CONCERNING the PRODUCTS.

25) Documents sufficient to identify each and every PRODUCT, including but not limited to the Star Citizen and Squadron 42 video games, specifically the dates of conception and the names and roles of any employees or contractors of DEFENDANTS involved in the development of each PRODUCT.

26) All manuals, instructions, and instructional material, design drawings or renderings, and technical DOCUMENTS or COMMUNICATIONS CONCERNING the PRODUCTS.

27) All DOCUMENTS or COMMUNICATIONS CONCERNING the marketing or publicity of each version of the PRODUCTS, including but not limited to press releases, product launch announcements, fact sheets, presentations, fundraising materials, sales literature, brochures, catalogs, trade letters, press releases, audio or video files, materials posted on internet websites and message boards, information prepared for electronics or gaming shows and conventions, and other marketing materials.

28) All DOCUMENTS and COMMUNICATIONS CONCERNING CRYENGINE, including but not limited to press releases, product launch announcements, fact sheets, presentations, fundraising materials, sales literature, brochures, catalogs, trade letters, press releases, audio or video files, materials posted on internet websites and message boards, information prepared for electronics or gaming shows and conventions, and other marketing materials.

29) All DOCUMENTS and COMMUNICATIONS CONCERNING any game engine, including but not limited to press releases, product launch announcements, fact sheets, presentations, fundraising materials, sales literature, brochures, catalogs, trade letters, press releases, audio or video files, materials posted on internet websites and message boards, information prepared for electronics or gaming shows and conventions, and other marketing materials.

30) To the extent not requested by the prior requests contained herein, all DOCUMENTS and COMMUNICATIONS CONCERNING DEFENDANTS' involvement with demonstrations, booths, presentations, and panels at electronics or gaming shows or conferences, including but not limited to any DOCUMENTS identifying attendees at each electronics or gaming show or conference.

31) To the extent not requested by the prior requests contained herein, all DOCUMENTS and COMMUNICATIONS CONCERNING the PRODUCTS.

32) All versions of source code (including but not limited to source code comments), object code, and software for each of the PRODUCTS, including but not limited to the Star Citizen and Squadron 42 video games.

33) All DOCUMENTS that reflect current or past revisions or additions to any and all versions of the source code for each of the PRODUCTS, including but not limited to the Star Citizen and Squadron 42 video games, specifically those DOCUMENTS that reflect the author of each revision or addition and the date on which each revision or addition was made.

34) All versions of source code (including but not limited to source code comments), object code, and software for CRYENGINE.

35) All versions of source code (including but not limited to source code comments), object code, and software for any game engine.

36) All DOCUMENTS that reflect current or past revisions or additions to any and all versions of the source code for CRYENGINE or any other game engine, specifically those DOCUMENTS that reflect the author of each revision or addition and the date on which each revision or addition was made.

37) All DOCUMENTS and COMMUNICATIONS CONCERNING any similarities or differences between the PRODUCTS and CRYENGINE, including without limitation any DOCUMENTS and COMMUNICATIONS regarding the testing thereof.

38) All DOCUMENTS and COMMUNICATIONS CONCERNING any similarities or differences between CRYENGINE and any other game engine, including without limitation any DOCUMENTS and COMMUNICATIONS regarding a comparison thereof.

40) To the extent not requested by the prior requests contained herein, DOCUMENTS sufficient to identify all source code repository system or software used by DEFENDANTS.

41) To the extent not requested by the prior requests contained herein, all source code, object code, or software containing a CRYTEK copyright notice.

42) To the extent not requested by the prior requests contained herein, all DOCUMENTS that reflect any efforts to remediate, rewrite, or clean room any of the PRODUCTS.

43) All DOCUMENTS and COMMUNICATIONS CONCERNING any game engine, netcode, or editor license for the PRODUCTS, including but not limited to the license agreement itself and any consideration paid.

44) All DOCUMENTS or COMMUNICATIONS CONCERNING any efforts or attempts by DEFENDANTS to obtain or utilize information, technology or know-how of CRYTEK.

45) All DOCUMENTS CONCERNING any investigation into whether DEFENDANTS possess or have used or disclosed materials that are, or that CRYTEK has asserted are, copyrighted or otherwise owned by CRYTEK.

46) All DOCUMENTS that identify and describe those PERSONS or entities that have or have had access to the PRODUCTS, including but not limited to Faceware Technologies. PERSONS and entities include but are not limited to suppliers, vendors, and visitors to DEFENDANTS' offices and displays or demonstrations at electronics or gaming shows or conventions, technicians, partners, consultants, and customers.

47) All DOCUMENTS that identify and describe those PERSONS or entities that 3 have or have had access to CRYTEK source code, object code, or software in DEFENDANTS�' possession, including but not limited to Faceware Technologies. PERSONS and entities include but are not limited to suppliers, vendors, visitors to DEFENDANTS' offices and displays or demonstrations at electronics or gaming shows or conventions, technicians, partners, consultants, and customers.

48) Documents sufficient to identify each employee of DEFENDANTS that was previously employed by CRYTEK, including but not limited to the name of that employee and their job responsibilities.

49) All DOCUMENTS and COMMUNICATIONS CONCERNING the departure of, or the recruitment, solicitation, interviewing, consideration for hire, or hiring of current or past employees of CRYTEK.

50) The employee or personnel file for Chris Roberts, Ortwin Freyermuth, Carl Jones, Sean Tracy, Hannes Appel]l, Francesco Riziero Di Mizio, Chris Nolan, Marco Corbetta, Carsten Wenzel, Christopher Raine, and Christopher Bolte including but not limited to any employment, confidentiality, non-compete, or non-disclosure agreements.

51) All DOCUMENTS, including but not limited to investment memoranda and proposals, CONCERNING the business and/or valuation of DEFENDANTS.

52) All DOCUMENTS, including but not limited to investment memoranda and proposals, CONCERNING the business and/or valuation of the PRODUCTS.

53) All DOCUMENTS, including but not limited to investment memoranda and proposals, CONCERNING the business and/or valuation of CRYTEK or CRYENGINE.

54) All federal or state tax returns filed by or on behalf of DEFENDANTS.

55) All quarterly or annual financial statements of DEFENDANTS.

56) All Competitive analysis of DEFENDANTS, CRYTEK, the video game engine market, or the video game market.

57) All DOCUMENTS and COMMUNICATIONS CONCERNING a license or agreement for any game engine, including but not limited to any license or agreement itself.

58) Documents sufficient to identify each version or iteration of agreements or contracts with the DEFENDANTS' past, present or potential suppliers, contractors and customers.

59) All DOCUMENTS CONCERNING business plans, forecasts, financial statements or analyses or projections of DEFENDANTS or the PRODUCTS.

60) Documents sufficient to determine DEFENDANTS' total profits and revenue, and profits and revenue derived from each of the PRODUCTS, for each fiscal year and quarter from inception to present.

61) Documents sufficient to identify costs incurred by DEFENDANTS to develop the PRODUCTS.

62) All DOCUMENTS CONCERNING the pricing or pricing plans for the PRODUCTS.

63) Documents sufficient to identify document preservation polices and/or 9 practices of DEFENDANTS, including but not limited to the policies and/or practices in relation to preservation of e-mail and electronically stored DOCUMENTS and COMMUNICATIONS.

64) All DOCUMENTS and COMMUNICATIONS CONCERNING Ortwin Freyermuth's representation of DEFENDANTS, including but not limited to DOCUMENTS and COMMUNICATIONS CONCERNING any conflict of interest arising from that representation.

65) All DOCUMENTS and COMMUNICATIONS CONCERNING Ortwin Freyermuth's representation of CRYTEK, including but not limited to DOCUMENTS and COMMUNICATIONS CONCERNING any conflict of interest arising from that representation.

66) To the extent not requested by the prior requests contained herein, all DOCUMENTS and COMMUNICATIONS CONCERNING the "Bugsmashers!" online video series, including but not limited to video clips and uncut and original versions of video clips.

67) To the extent not requested by the prior requests contained herein, all DOCUMENTS and COMMUNICATIONS CONCERNING the "Reverse Technology Transfer" provision of the Game License Agreement dated November 5 20, 2012, including but not limited to any DOCUMENTS and COMMUNICATIONS CONCERNING efforts by DEFENDANTS to comply or not comply with such provision.

68) To the extent not requested by the prior requests contained herein, an executable or compiled version of each of the PRODUCTS that has been released to the public.

69) To the extent not requested by the prior requests contained herein, all versions of any splash screen or credits screen used in the PRODUCTS.

Hav fucked around with this message at 14:58 on Aug 15, 2018

# ? Aug 15, 2018 14:54

Tinfoil Papercut: Jul 27, 2016; by Athanatos

brb e-mailing CryTek to see if I can pledge for some sweet Hunt:Showdown gun jpgs to help their legal costs.

# ? Aug 15, 2018 14:54

Tinfoil Papercut: Jul 27, 2016; by Athanatos

They said "no" and "it was weird of me to ask."

# ? Aug 15, 2018 14:55

G0RF: Mar 19, 2015; Some galactic defender you are, Space Cadet.

tuo posted:

"IT IS SO ORDERED" is how a true Lesnick challenge starts

In the interest of Space Court justice, I hope Lesnick will be called into a courtroom to explain �Star Citizen and Squadron aren�t separate, they�re a la carte.�

�

Nothingburger 2: The Cry-REKTioning

quote:

�All this means is that about half of CryTek's case didn't even meet the minimum standard to be allowed to appear in a court of law. The other half has just enough substance that the judge has to allow them to actually make their arguments before telling them to take a hike.

This is not a win for CryTek, it's an absolute bloodbath. CIG got half of their complaints deleted before they even hit the floor. That bodes very, very poorly for the strength of the rest of their case.�

# ? Aug 15, 2018 14:56

Hav: Dec 11, 2009; Fun Shoe

Tinfoil Papercut posted:

They said "no" and "it was weird of me to ask."

Quick, send a Phoenix Wright costume to fix your horrible error and repair your hounoure.

(not anime)

# ? Aug 15, 2018 14:59

TheAgent: Feb 16, 2002; The call is coming from inside Dr. House; Grimey Drawer

the weird thing is even without punitive damages, crytek could still ask for tens of millions or that production halt until their codebase is purged of cryengine code

like yeah, the punitive damages thing is awesome because then you can take a percentage of funds from the company or even shareholders to say "you did bad," but proving that there's punitive reasons in a case like this is still a hard sell to a jury (in almost any case, actually) unless you have mountains of evidence that basically confesses the evil scheme and all the assholes in it

# ? Aug 15, 2018 15:01

Tippis: Mar 21, 2008; It's yet another day in the wasteland.

G0RF posted:

Nothingburger 2: The Cry-REKTioning

Interesting definition of �half�

# ? Aug 15, 2018 15:02

Virtual Captain: Feb 20, 2017; Archive Priest of the Stimperial Order

Star Citizen Good, in all things forevermore. Amen.

TheAgent posted:

the punitive damages thing is awesome because then you can take a percentage of funds from the company or even shareholders to say "you did bad," but proving that there's punitive reasons in a case like this is still a hard sell to a jury (in almost any case, actually) unless you have mountains of evidence that basically confesses the evil scheme and all the assholes in it

In other words, a very good chance. :laugh:

# ? Aug 15, 2018 15:09

Adbot: ADBOT LOVES YOU

# ? May 31, 2024 15:54

G0RF: Mar 19, 2015; Some galactic defender you are, Space Cadet.

Tippis posted:

Interesting definition of �half�

You�re just not hip to the new math because you still trust in stuff like �physics�, Tippis!

# ? Aug 15, 2018 15:13

The Something Awful Forums > Archives > Comedy Goldmine > The Goodmine > Star Citizen: Death of a Space Thread?

«‹›6530 »