Which wasn’t actually a USPTO reviewer, btw; the Copyright Office is part of the Library of Congress, not the USPTO.
DETAILS
Derek sometimes blows things out of proportion.
And you still haven’t answered my question :)
Derek made a special hand signal in his latest Star Citizen video.
“Launch Fighters!” ™
This board needs likes
The polygon article on the recent news was updated to include a letter from Stardock to Valve requesting the games be put back up. It confirms as assumed that Stardock has indemnified Valve.
“As previously agreed between Stardock and GOG, Stardock has agreed to indemnify GOG in this litigation and intends to continue to do so during the pendency of this litigation.”
Edit: Also of note is the letter is dated Jan. 16th. I wonder why the long delay in issuing a counterclaim?
So basically Brad has legally said that Valve and GOG don’t need the safe harbor protection because Stardock is assuming that liability?
Well, Stardock cared about GOG enough to start this whole mess by going to GOG and telling them that Star Control is their game now and sell it in their name. (Which GOG either stupidly or maliciously assumed was true without doing… any sort of checking.)
That sounds like a risky move to me if it’s true. I guess Brad is going all in on this one.
The whole claim of DMCA ABUSE!!! makes me roll my eyes because this is literally the situation that the DMCA is for.
If he wanted Star Control Origins back up he had to do it, basically. As that’s part of a counterclaim. I’m not sure he thought too hard beyond ‘PR victory if they are put back up on Steam and GOG!’
EDIT: Grr, how do I stop being a new user so I can actually reply to this thread moreee?
Yep, indemnification is basically an agreement for one party to cover any judgement against another party.
Given the confirmation of indemnification, the calculation Valve and GOG would have made to determine whether to put the game back up is not “does the game infringe” but instead “would Stardock be able to cover any judgement against us”. The issue of whether the game infringes or not doesn’t really factor in. You don’t risk your company’s assets on the other guy’s claims. Quite the opposite, you assume they will lose and lose as hard as possible and calculate how much you would be on the hook for if that happens and make sure the indemnifying party has the ability to pay.
Since any judgement against Valve or GoG would be based on the revenue received by sales of the game, the calculation was likely; Are Stardock’s corporate assets greater than some multiple of the revenue the game has made and is expected to make before the case is decided?
I just noticed that scribd has two letters in it. The GoG one is below if you scroll more. It’s dated Jan 23.
So they didn’t contest on Steam until the 16th and GoG until the 23rd.
(sorry for the multiple posts in a row)
Also known as a standard DMCA counter-claim. yawn
Nope. The game coming to GoG was already a given, and just a matter of time.
Wrong. What I was hinting (still not yet public) at pertains to the lawsuit, not the game’s DMCA status.
It wasn’t “assumed”. There is a blanket indemnification when you put a game on any third-party site. If Steam asked for any additional protections, it’s probably related to the DMCA matter; though it’s highly unlikely that they would have required additional indemnification, regardless.
Um, it was assumed as in many of us, myself included, assumed it would be the case.
Stop looking for points to try and nitpick. If you have news out with it.