The Third Doctrinal War -- Stardock, Reiche/Ford, and Star Control

I think the point is that registering trademarks on the names of aliens and concepts used within the game is neither a necessary nor common practice (except with huge properties), and the failure to do it is not proof that you don’t intend to employ the property later. Paul & Fred own the copyright to the content (or believe they do—Stardock is now trying to claim they don’t). Stardock owns the trademark on the title of the games, and now is trying to claim they (or those they bought the rights from) have always owned the trademarks on all alien names, etc. (while only officially filing for them recently).

What Paul & Fred have always said they wanted to do is continue the story of Star Control II. They have clearly never felt attached to the Star Control name itself (I bet in retrospect they wish they’d just bought it from Stardock for $400k just to save themselves all this legal trouble!).

Actually, thinking through this a little more, there’s also a pretty much airtight argument that the fact that Stardock hasn’t actually tried to enforce trademark claims against UQM for Arilou, Syreen, etc., means that they’re estopped from being able to enforce those rights (assuming they ever had them) against P&F. Stardock has clearly known about UQM’s use for years, so they have constructively abandoned those marks.

  1. I’m not an authority on IP law, just pointing out how you can capture a name for branding purposes if it’s important to you. Also good on P&R for holding copyrights to the software

  2. Of course Stardock has to defend the IP they bought (or thought they bought). If one of us bought Star Control we would be foolish not to defend it from dilution (like marketing that says … “The Sequel To Star Control!”)

  3. We are all armchair lawyering here, which is fine. This is exactly what the courts are for though. I’m curious about this case because to me it would make it less likely for people to buy the rights to old games with the intention of remaking them.

  4. This is all about the relationship between Stardock and P&F deteriorating, and the ambiguity of an old contract that might or might not be enforcable. I suppose good contracts matter. I also didn’t see Firaxis and Gollop fighting over the XCOM relaunch. Both parties could probably learn a lesson there.

My point is they have already failed to defend the IP that they’re (now) claiming to own, specifically the names of the alien species. That they felt the need to try to make a play for them anyway is - in my personal opinion as someone who knows quite a lot about IP law - an indication that their case is weak.

Since therms like “ambiguity” are being thrown around to muddy the waters, let me quote this again from the original contracts:

“The Reiche Intellectual Property shall include proprietary rights in and to any source code, names (of starships and alien races), characters, plot lines, setting, terminology unique to the Star Control products”

There’s really no ambiguity there.

In contrast here is the entirety of the text from the supporting materials that Stardock has produced to support it’s claim that Accolade in the first place owned all the IP including things like the alien race names and that Stardock specifically purchased them at the auction.

" "

That seems pretty clear cut. No cutoff date on those rights, and the contract is still valid? I’m not sure about the “rights” phrase, that term is ambiguous and could be defined way better, like “retains copyright of in perpetuity” or something.

That’s a pretty good arguement for P&F. I still stand by my sour grapes theory, as this is what it looks like from the outside.

If that clause holds up, it appears Accolade, or whoever Stardock bought it from, only sold the name “Star Control” and nothimg else. Lawyer fail on Stardock’s part when doing the transaction.

I imagine the lawsuit/courts will decide what was sold and what was transfered. Yet still, saying you have “rights” in a contract and then not having anythung filed is terribly ambiguous to the wider market. To me it makes Star Control a bit of a poison pill.

How can you stand by the “sour grapes” theory when they are the defendants? How on earth does that make sense?

Weren’t they originally sued becasue they were using the name “Star Control” to market their product? I admit the timeline is a bit confusing.

Sour grapes because this all happened because Stardock announced a new Star Control. I doubt any of this stuff would have happened without that event.

Wrong again. Read Nightgaunt’s great timeline at the top of this thread.

Stardock sued P&F after P&F announced their own game, which was well after Stardock had announced their new Star Control game.

Yes, they were sued. At least you now acknowledge that.

They made a blog post announcing that they were finally free to make a sequel to Star Control 2: The Ur-Quan Masters and they mentioned they created that game. There is a legal question of whether that constitutes infringement or if it is normative use. They did not use the mark “Star Control” in the name of their project, only mentioned in the context of continuing the story they originally created. So there is a case that is could be considered normative use rather than infringement. When their use of the name was called out they changed it and included the proper marks recognizing Stardock’s trademark. I don’t think many people have strong opinions on this issue. If P&F are found to have infringed with the original announcement some non-ridiculous damages would be proper.

On top of that, there is Stardock’s attempts to gain control of not just the “Star Control” trademark, but any and all things related to Star Control like the alien names. That’s the real crux of this. Stardock, despite their rather transparent denials, is trying to prevent P&F from making a follow up to their story on their own without control or interference from Stardock. In Stardock’s settlement offer, in response to having the audacity to mention they created SC2 and plan to make a follow up to that story (not under the Star Control mark) Stardock demanded almost a quarter of a million dollars, and not just cash, they demanded that P&F turn over all their rights to anything related to the games and would prevent them from even working on any similar game for five years. These actions to try and take the IP that they assured the fan community was not theirs and they would never try to take has turned a lot of people against Stardock on this issue. What’s worse is that while doing all that, they repeatedly made statements to the fanbase that were in direct contradiction to their actions.

I ask again, how do any of the facts of the situation support a theory that P&F are doing things out of “sour grapes”?

I also have to note that you expressed the theory earlier that P&F never really intended to make a game. Since the lawsuit is literally over their announced intent to do so can you now see what that claim is rather ridiculous.

We’ll see how it plays out in court, I suppose. I just want to play a new Star Control game.

As a consumer, I don’t care if there is one new game or two. The timing of the announcements and legal actions is interesting, though. The fact that P&R announced after Stardock makes me think they were trying to ride some marketing coattails. I don’t think either party is blameless here.

But that’s why we have courts, so we don’t have to do pistols at dawn.

You started with such strong accusations and opinions. Now that some actual facts have been pointed out you’re just, meh, whatever.

Does this mean you have abandoned the notions that this is all just sour grapes and they never really wanted to make a game anyway? Or do you still believe that and just recognize you can’t really support or defend those positions?

There’s a lot of other things in the timeline too. Stardock bundling Star Control 1&2 with the pre-order for Origins without, it seems, the authority to actual sell SC 1&2 on Steam. They contend that they can for reasons but the actual documents that P&F have in their counter claims seem to indicate differently.

I think they wanted to make a game, maybe someday. I hadn’t seen any evidence that they were actually trying to do so. Where’s the screenshots, short clips, game features, etc?

Them coming out and saying they’re back and making the true sequel to Star Control right as Stardock is entering in the final year (and ramping up marketing) for their project is not coincidental. To me, it’s clear there was an attempt to hop on Stardock’s marketing push and to escalate the fight going on in the background. That being said, if they felt like their IP was being stolen then I absolutely don’t blame them one bit. They’re fighting to protect what they feel is theirs, and they can’t really just sit around.

I just don’t buy into the narrative that I’ve seen around where P&F are treated like a couple indies in a garage that just wanted to be left alone and make a game. :)

Seriously? You don’t want both?

Personally I’d love to see Stardock’s take (according to their original stated vision of a separate universe and not another SC3) and I’d love to see the guys who came up with the original story continue it.

Sometimes when information is taken in and digested people’s opinions and thoughts change and moderate. It’s a wonderful feeling to be able to do this.

And it’s absolutely sour grapes and coattail riding.

I still think Stardock has a strong case, they bought something in good faith (hopefully). If they lose they need to sue the people who sold them the rights and get their money back. But I suspect the courts will lean their way since Stardock has invested a ton of time and effort and P&F have invested nothing that I can see, not even time.

I’m glad Skylanders did so well. Of they aren’t stinking rich off that deal it’s their own fault.

Yes, it is.

Yet apparently you did not.

LOL

Certainly you understand we are in disagreement and you don’t have to take pot shots constantly. I won’t sink to your level, thanks.

While I am sure that Stardock’s actions to try and take over the franchise spurred them to act sooner rather than later, they have spoken many times over the years about returning to the franchise when they were able, and wanting to do it as a labor of love.

While yes there is an element of seeing P&F as underdogs compared to Stardock, that is literally because they are being sued personally and Stardock is a corporation. Sure, they are individuals who likely have made great money over the years, but who wants to have their retirement savings destroyed by crap like this. However I think you are magnifying the sentiment a bit when you state that people are attempting to portray them as two little indies in a garage.

Ironically part of Stardock’s narrative is to push the notion that P&F have claimed to be just two guys in a garage and that they have actively claimed to be the sole creators with nobody’s help, and thus they are literal frauds. In reality over the years in interviews and postings P&F have often acknowledged their team and given them praise and credit.