I’m just reading the tea leaves like everyone else, pal. I doubt anyone was saying Stardock would sue them and say “We own everything!” before that happened and yet, here we are.
I am a founder of SCO and have been privy to some information that is protected under a non disclosure agreement. I’m 99% sure that what I said was fine but that 1% niggled at me so I deleted my comments just to make sure I wasn’t inadvertently breaching the NDA.
You do get that Paul and Fred started it with a knowingly false takedown request (that failed, and was always going to, but was carefully timed), and everything that Stardock has done has been in response to it to protect themselves.
But no, you don’t, because you’ve already made up your mind on who is the evil party and who are the poor misrepresented indie developers, sorry, creators here.
Pal.
The problem with this thread (and the previous one) is that some posters just want to hurt Brad. It’s as simple as that. You could post a picture of him saving a puppy and he would get attacked. You can feel the anger radiate from some of the posts in the other thread.
I’d lock this thread personally. Nothing but tears and strife are ever going to come from it.
Knowingly false in your mind maybe. That’s not at all what I see in the original contracts, but ok. You’re a founder so you’ve got an investment to protect. Have fun!
Kind of feels that way, but I thought that was just me. From the very beginning, my sense was always that Brad had tremendous respect for Fred & Paul. I don’t think that’s changed. I think he’s just as frustrated with the way this has played out as anyone. Moreso, probably, since a part of him likely feels like he should have been able to prevent this. I don’t get the animosity toward him. I think the last thing in the world they want is to be engaged in this legal fiasco, but at this point, they also have a huge investment in Origins and they want to protect that.
Knowingly false in that the games went back up as soon as Stardock showed GOG the documents. Paul and Fred knew it would fail because they knew that Stardock has those permissions, but they also knew that GOG had to respond to the claim by taking the games down and then waiting for Stardock to prove they were allowed to have them up there.
So no, not all in my mind, actually.
Look, I have no history with Brad, but if he really had all that respect for them, why would he let the lawyers draw up something that totally negates their contribution to the original game? Too much of what he was up to all along looks to me like he knew he needed them, so cynical or not, that seems to me like buttering them up hoping he can bring what they own under his company’s roof.
It’s what lawyers do. I remember fighting with mine repeatedly when drawing up employee contracts when I was running a company. Maybe I’m naive and you’re right. (Note: I haven’t read all the settlement offers and stuff posted in the last couple of days)
Do you even understand that you’re interpreting it how you want to in your head same as the rest of us? This is not confirmed in a court by anyone at this point.
It’s all what you choose to believe and again, as a backer, well, you have a colored opinion going in because you paid for the game Brad is making.
I think what really stands out is using some of their stuff in promotional materials. If you truly were a fan and you respected their ownership, you don’t do that. The actions don’t hold up after all the words.
It doesn’t negate their contribution, but it does clarify it. Up until about 6 months ago, Paul and Fred were the designers of Starcon. Now suddenly they’re calling themselves the creators, and while that could be argued for on a “they were designing the game so they created it” emotional level, there is a legal definition of the word Creator that they do not fit since it was Accolate who created it and contracted P&F to design and work on it. There was a LOT of other people as well - P&F would love for you to think they were a couple of indie guys working nights in their basement, but that narrative simply isn’t true.
Stardock doesn’t dispute P&F ownership of the IP, but they have to protect their trademark because if they don’t they lose it. Paul and Fred don’t like that SD have the trademark because it means they can’t do what they want with their own IP. That sucks for them, to be sure, but it’s worth mentioning that they were offered the trademark at cost and turned it down, then proceeded to pretend they owned it and started using Trademark rights such as calling their new game the direct/true sequel to Star Control, which you can’t do if you just refused to buy the trademark of. Then they files a takedown of the original games, including SC3 which they had absolutely no input into and have no rights over other than the IP (which was licensed for the game and they’ve been getting royalties for, so they have no claims there.)
All the legal issues have come from all of that. Stardock haven’t done anything wrong up until all the legal shit started. Now it’s getting messy and mean on both sides, but that’s lawyers and the legal system for you. Brad Wardell isn’t even involved in the lawsuit, so pointing fingers at him is disingenuous.
I feel like there’s a fairly reasonable discussion happening with two financially vested people taking shots at anyone who isn’t 100% on Stardock’s message.
Yup.5
Which they are entitled to do because although P&F hold the IP rights, Stardock have a perpetual license to USE that stuff. Paul and Fred are claiming that agreement is invalid, and that’ll be for the court to decide, but when Stardock used that stuff (images and whatnot, they were never going to put the original aliens into the new game) they had the belief that they were entitled to. Maybe they weren’t and maybe they were, as I said, the court will decide that and it’ll come down to whether Accolade sold bad fruit, I guess.
Accolade never sold anything to Stardock. I think you should read more about what’s happened.
My summary of the situation, after reviewing the documents, is “You can’t buy something from someone who doesn’t own it.”
¯\_(ツ)_/¯
Financially vested? What a ridiculous statement - I spend more when I go out to dinner with my wife. I just dislike the white knighting that’s going on. I do get it - I was a massive fan of P&F ever since SC1 and SC2 and have been hanging out for years for them to put out a new game. But it seems me me like they have sour grapes because they sat on their hands for 25 years and now somebody is going to put out a new SC game first and they’re having a bit of a tantrum about it.
Accolade, Atari, Stardock. You knew what I was saying. Way to strawman my argument though.
Joins the forum to call us all white knights.
It’s sad because instead of having a reasonable discussion this intentional pot stirring will work and get you what you want, a locked thread.