I agree that the go fund me thing is silly and there’s no reason to apologize. I think that this is the kind of situation where we’re all going to have different opinions as outsiders.
I find it amusing that Brad Wardell of all people is complaining about someone claiming their game is a “spiritual successor” to a trademark they do not own.
On the actual case, the bottom line is Brad’s the one who filed the lawsuit, and I don’t see anything in F+Gs conduct that needs a major lawsuit. What is the thing they have done that significantly endangers Stardocks business?
This lawsuit is retaliation for the lawsuit against Stardock for selling old versions of Star Control.
If you’re familiar with Stardock drama, you’ll remember this tactic.
Forest for the trees. It doesn’t matter that they were starting fires. It doesn’t matter that Stardock started fires (re-read the time line if you need to; Stardock plenty and started them first).
If you wanted to talk about the various times over the last year or so, say, where the parties tried to reach an agreement that would all be well and good. We probably won’t ever know the full contents, or tone, with which those talks took place. It’s certainly possible that both sides felt wronged and it caused them to overreact/escalate when there was no reason to. I have no doubt they both share some blame. But you’re acting like Stardock and P&F have just been trading punches more or less equally and are equally responsible for where we are. This is complete and utter nonsense and we shouldn’t act like it is anything else. When they were publicly sparring at one point, maybe we had that situation. But we do not anymore. Even then. . .
Let me approach this from a different angle. Setting aside the talks/attempts to reach an agreement of some sort entirely, this situation could not be simply reversed. There are scenarios where P&F might have tried to “play hardball” (roley eyes) and threatened to sue or actually sued.
-
When Stardock let them know about acquiring the “The IP” (insofar as what everyone thought that meant at the time), and the intent to make a game. Or at any time in the next 4 years, or at the Origins announcement. They did not do this. And I don’t see where they were sending signals that they might.
-
If Stardock says it’s going to use things it was told it wasn’t able to use (and, agreed on that front, P&F might sue.
-
If Stardock claims to own things it previously said P&F owned, ditto.
-
If Stardock claims to have the rights to sell things it previously said it did not, and then actually sells them.
#4 led to a separate suit, only about that issue (and initiated by P&F, I believe) and this is also a crucial point. Any one of those things could have blown up into a fight for all the marbles started by P&F but did not. The fight they did pick was far narrower.
P&F had other opportunities to contest Stardock on things and did not. They could have gone for all the marbles probably back in 2013 (mind you, I think they lose that fight), and did not and showed no interest in doing so. Instead it’s Stardock suing P&F, for what seems like everything (although I really ought to read more closely). Stardock might have simply filed suit to try and settle the claims they were originally making (e.g. they own “Star Control” and can make a game Star Control not using the old races and what not). They did not.
This is not about one side being good guys or bad guys. It’s not about the number of fires each side started, or the size of the fires. The Stardock suit is fire bombing the entire city. You cannot even see the other fires anymore. And even when Stardock decided they needed to contest this legally, they did not have to go down this specific road.
That’s the context.
And while you didn’t say it, I am tossing this out there. It doesn’t matter that “this is the way we do business/this is how you fight a war” (simplistic nonsense). Many certainly do business this way. Nobody has to do business this way.
FWIW, I think the best outcome is everyone making their own game, as was talked about even in the middle of 2017. I don’t think that possibility is entirely off the board, but yeah it’s not looking so good.
Be a contrarian. Don’t let it get in the way of dual wielding logic and reason for great justice, etc etc etc. Also maybe don’t hold your breath for both sides making a game.
There was no lawsuit against Stardock. They filed a DCMA takedown notice. A DCMA takedown is nothing even close to a lawsuit. It’s a request to remove copyrighted materials. That’s it. You ask a content provider “Hey, A is using my copyrighted material”, the provider notifies A and can take it down temporarily. The target can appeal and claim they have rights. At this point what often happens, and what happened with Steam, is the provider says “okay then, you guys figure it out” and they put the content back up.
Separately, in reply in general to the thread; Reading into people’s statements some sort of extreme black and white pre-existing bias just because after looking into the situation they favor one side is a silly exercise and a bit offense to the participants. Because several people have similar opinions on who is more right tor less wrong in a dispute that doesn’t mean that the thread or its participants are biased. I don’t think anybody has claimed that P&F have never done anything wrong. There’s no need to try and create false equivalence in the name of balance.
Well clearly I can’t even follow this thread. I guess that’s why I don’t make the big bucks in IP law.
Initially Stardock’s stance is that all they bought was the trademark and that P&F owned all the lore and they would respectfully not use any of it and that they hoped one day P&F would make a real sequel to the SC2 story. They repeated this line for years before behind the scenes filing a lawsuit and for trademarks on all the alien names from the lore.
There really wan’t anything to contest until Stardock’s position changed to “they aren’t the creators, they own nothing, everything involving the prior games that can be owned is ours because it might cause confusion with our trademark”, which was only at the end of last year.
I think many people are missing that one huge element that has caused people to form opinions about this dispute is that complete turn around in Stardock’s position from one of respect and appreciation to literally claiming P&F are liars for saying they were the creators of SC2 and demanding tons of cash in restitution for them having made such a claim.
I really don’t understand how one can not see it as ridiculous that P&F are being sued for untold damages because they dared to say they were the creators Star Control 1 and 2?
Even if you think that isn’t ridiculous, consider that the people suing them now for years prior also said they were the creators of those games. Only recently does Stardock say they “discovered” that P&F weren’t really the creators. While I do find this tactic pretty low, it is also kind of hilarious. The astonishment that their PR people have had to feign over finding out only recently that P&F aren’t really the creators is downright funny in a way.
It is indisputably a complicated mess. I happen to like complicated messes so I read up a bunch when this first came up, and every week or two I scan over reddit and forums where this is being discussed to see if there are any developments. Some of the forums have active involvement from Stardock’s PR and CEO so you can see directly what they are claiming and how those claimed evolved. My opinion on all this has mainly been solidified by their statements. “Thank you for the exhibit” I think was the straw that broke the camel’s back of plausible good faith.
Given my enjoyment of complete messes, I’d post more in the Star Citizen thread but every time I catch up with that all I can do is blink for a few minutes and move on.
Let’s talk rhetoric and tactics on both sides (merits of the cases aside,for the moment).
Stardock:
- Declared their respect and admiration of Paul & Fred and the original games once they got a hold of the trademark. Stated in interviews that they had been working with P&F on the game (not true). Later declared in a lawsuit that P&F could not claim to be the creators of the franchise.
- Publicly declared that Stardock did not have the rights to the original games’ story and aliens, and also that the game is so old that they wouldn’t want them. Behind the scenes, asked P&F to be involved in the game and asked to license their work. Later proposed in a settlement offer that Stardock receive the rights to use all of P&F’s creative work in SC:O.
- Initiated their lawsuit when P&F pushed back on the release of rebranded versions of the original games to digital storefronts. Declared that the sales of those games are small potatoes that don’t matter.
- As things got more contentious, filed for trademarks over nearly all of the unique alien names and features of the original games, including IP that Stardock previously declared it could not use and did not want.
Paul & Fred
- Often declared over the years their desire to return to the Star Control universe. Announced their new game around the 25th anniversary of SC2, which also coincided with the run-up to Stardock’s SC:O beta launch. Don’t appear to have a team, design, or code underway for the game, just the intent to work on it.
- Stated that Stardock (and Atari before them) own the trademark to the name of Star Control. In lawsuits, have alleged that actually all ownership of all things SC reverted to them when Accolade failed to pay licensing fees.
- Announced GotP as “a direct sequel Star Control 2” and themselves as “Creators of Star Control 2.” Again, this was during the marketing of SC:O and its fleet battle beta.
- Began airing the “dirty laundry” of the disputes with Stardock on their website, while Stardock was still declaring their love and respect for P&F. This started with the fights over the rights to publish the games on digital stores, then the filing of Stardock’s lawsuit and P&F’s countersuit, then the release of two competing settlement offers. The “scorched earth” approach in the Stardock settlement offer (a common practical tactic in settlement negotiations) was clearly meant to be contrasted unfavorably with P&F’s reasonable “live and let live” approach.
- Hired a public relations firm to represent them, which made statements disparaging Stardock and Brad Wardell and their case.
- Appealed to their fans to help defray their legal costs.
If you were to characterize the two sides’ tactics, you’d see some notable differences:
- Stardock and Brad Wardell often say things that are belied by other actions or statements. Their story changed over time, apparently to suit the PR needs of their project. Meanwhile, Paul & Fred were mostly silent about the trademark purchase and announcement of SC:O, but when they have spoken out, they’ve been generally very consistent.
- Stardock has an actual product to create and promote, which they’ve invested a lot of time and money into. P&F have seemingly barely begun on their game, and its timeline is uncertain and probably a long way from realization. The disputes over the original games and concerns about Stardock’s treatment of the IP appear to have prompted their announcement.
- P&F have played a “hearts and minds” strategy, appealing to public sentiment, including releasing normally confidential documents when they make Stardock look bad. Stardock has initiated all the major legal action, and in those filings has taken a severe and maximalist approach in their claims and requests for remuneration.
Whichever side one leans towards (or none, or both) I think this a very helpful and fair minded summary. Cheers.
I’m just incredibly sad that all this money is being wasted on patent/trademark lawyers when it could be going into expanding what could be excellent games from both parties. It’s like taking a suitcase full of cash and throwing it on a bonfire. Then when everyone catches their breath and sanity they say, “WTF did we just do?”
Great summary.
I wasn’t aware of that, Shuma. Is there anywhere I can go to read up on what they’re planning on doing?
I’m talking about this exchange between myself and Brad:
Stardock is all over reddit today. This link shows the most recent comments on the starcontrol board there, https://www.reddit.com/r/starcontrol/comments/
Here’s a recent one where Stardock justifies their recent moves to put the SC2 aliens in their game by blaming it on the fans who demand the classic aliens be included:
Which is kind of ridiculous since fans don’t just want the aliens to be in there and SC3 can be pointed to as proof. Fans who care about the aliens being in there want the story continued by the guys that dreamed it up, not another SC3. They plan to include the aliens, but make them look just a bit different to skirt around further copyright issues.
There’s also a statement in there that says Stardock’s position has always been that if P&F ever wanted to make a game continuing the story they would have to license the IP from Stardock. It makes it pretty clear that when they said, and continue to say, they in no way wish to prevent P&F from making a game, it comes with the unspoken caveat of “as long as it is under our control”.
This stuff with the old characters sure seems to run in sharp contrast with this post
Edit: what I’d forgotten here is that Brad did maintain they had an unlimited license to use those things. I think it was his intent at the beginning not to use a bunch of the old stuff, even though they felt they had license to do so.
Brad lies. How much more evidence do people need?
And right there is why many have formed their opinions about the dispute.
The way to now weasel around prior (and often continued) statements and promises is to create implied criteria and caveats to those statements. Like the “we’re not trying to prevent them from making a game” statement has the unspoken caveat “as long as it is according to our license terms”.
“At no time were we under the impression we were getting ownership of the classic characters.”
See what that actually means is that they weren’t getting ownership of the exact characters and their exact representations, as in they won’t use the bitmaps and exact lines of dialogue from the original games. Of course that statement needed no qualification to say “but yes, we own the names and anyone who makes anything using the aliens in any way has to do it under license from us” because everybody knows the plain and indisputable fact that a trademark means you own anything and everything that could be associated enough with a brand to create confusion.