Sequels strife

Ahh, vague omens and mysterious portents. Tangled webs of fate intertwined with the branches of destiny, blown by the capricious winds of happenstance. News, news....uh, actually there is some news!

Moderator: ZFP Peacekeepers

User avatar
Borgie
Hunam adventurer
Posts: 11
Joined: Sun Feb 17, 2019 9:23 pm

Re: Sequels strife

Post by Borgie » Tue Feb 19, 2019 1:49 pm

Hi everyone. New forum member here, long time fan of SC/SC2.

I’ve got to say, when I first heard of Origins, I was quite excited. I was a little confused at some of the game play choices (planets), but I quickly found out it was not created by P&F. I still looked forward to buying it. SC3 was still entertaining to me.

After hearing about the lawsuit, I did a fair bit of research on the subject. I’m not a lawyer, but it’s pretty clear to me about how ownership was meant to be handled.

I’ll agree that F&P may not have handled this the best, but I doubt I’d have done any better in their situation.
Imagine going on holidays and letting your neighbour use your car. You come back, and your neighbour has sold his house. Your new neighbour is claiming they own your car. I don’t expect I would be happy about this.

Originally I was for both games being created. As it stands now, I’ve lost all respect for Stardock as a company, and for the CEO as an adult. How this plays out in court will likely depend on legal technicalities, so we’ll have to wait and see.

User avatar
Draxas
Atum-ta the Sixth
Posts: 1320
Joined: Wed Mar 17, 2010 4:09 am
Location: Pennsylvania, USA

Re: Sequels strife

Post by Draxas » Tue Feb 19, 2019 6:03 pm

krulle wrote:
Thu Feb 14, 2019 6:53 pm
Pity that the content of whatever discover material has been handed over falls under non-dislosure requirements...
Otherwise they could outsource sifting through e-mails to "us"....
Unless you (and the rest of us) are a lawyer, this would be a BAD idea. The concept of legal importance in any document, especially something as typically transient as an email, is very difficult to ascertain even for lawyers, never mind laypeople. For example, at my job, we are told to retain any documents or emails that might even be peripherally related when a subject becomes the topic of a legal hold. But we are only saving these items so they are not inadvertently deleted, it is the counsel's job to go through and determine what, if anything, is relevant. Trying to make that sort of judgment call, especially without having all of the details of an ongoing case, is nigh impossible without a legal background, and may whatever deity you believe in help you if you destroy something important, even inadvertently. The penalties for that are quite stiff.

Matthias
Hunam adventurer
Posts: 19
Joined: Sat Aug 04, 2018 4:35 am

Re: Sequels strife

Post by Matthias » Wed Feb 20, 2019 4:50 am

Apparently, SCO is off GOG again, something about P&F DMCAing GOG’s ISP? Anyone have any insight?

Elestan
Silly Supox
Posts: 51
Joined: Thu Oct 04, 2012 12:28 pm

Re: Sequels strife

Post by Elestan » Wed Feb 20, 2019 5:38 am

Matthias wrote:
Wed Feb 20, 2019 4:50 am
Apparently, SCO is off GOG again, something about P&F DMCAing GOG’s ISP? Anyone have any insight?
All we know at this point is that the game is no longer available on GOG. We don't have any reliable information about the cause until/unless it shows up in a court filing, or somebody posts actual documents.

Matthias
Hunam adventurer
Posts: 19
Joined: Sat Aug 04, 2018 4:35 am

Re: Sequels strife

Post by Matthias » Wed Feb 20, 2019 6:05 am

You know Elestan, I saw something you said earlier about how Brad seemed genuinely shocked that P&F didn’t want to work with him. I’m going to take that a step further, that the impression I’m getting from his emails and such is that he felt he had bought himself a lot of favor and credit with his fandom. I think it’s clear that he is/was a genuine and sincere fan of P&F and Star Control and was, at least initially, as genuinely excited at the prospect of GotP as any of the rest of us. But the sense that I’m getting is that his fanboyism and general pedestal he placed P&F gave him the impression that he was free to take various liberties, like selling the classic games without P&F’s permission, without going through the proper channels, and is shocked and indignant that P&F is holding him back from what he feels he earned/deserves. Similar to a guy who pays for an expensive date with a girl and gets angry when she declines going home with him, which he feel he earned.

Elestan
Silly Supox
Posts: 51
Joined: Thu Oct 04, 2012 12:28 pm

Re: Sequels strife

Post by Elestan » Wed Feb 20, 2019 7:12 am

Matthias wrote:
Wed Feb 20, 2019 6:05 am
...the impression I’m getting from his emails and such is that he felt he had bought himself a lot of favor and credit with his fandom.
He had. People were genuinely thrilled that a new SC game would finally be made, and many of the original fans became Stardock "Founders". But much of that fan enthusiasm was based on the assumption that this meant that we'd be getting a return to the UQM universe, and he seems to have been unable to admit (to himself or to the fans) that P&F were not going to permit that, and that Stardock's games would consequently never be more than "spiritual successors" in the eyes of those fans.
I think it’s clear that he is/was a genuine and sincere fan of P&F and Star Control...
I don't doubt that he enjoyed playing the games, but he wasn't active in the SC/UQM fan community until after he bought the Atari assets and was motivated to try to build a customer base for his upcoming game. His posts in the various forums have pretty much all been either marketing SC:O, or arguing about the legal dispute.
...and was, at least initially, as genuinely excited at the prospect of GotP as any of the rest of us.
I would like to think that, but his own emails say otherwise. Here is his Oct 9, 2017 post joyously announcing GotP to the UQM forum. But we now know that just two days earlier, he was threatening P&F and insisting that they weren't allowed to make any new UQM games - under any name - without his permission. So it's pretty clear that he was only feigning his support, most likely because he knew that open conflict with P&F would cost him sales. This is not the only time we've discovered that what he said in public differed from what he said in private.
Last edited by Elestan on Wed Feb 20, 2019 2:18 pm, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
Borgie
Hunam adventurer
Posts: 11
Joined: Sun Feb 17, 2019 9:23 pm

Re: Sequels strife

Post by Borgie » Wed Feb 20, 2019 1:33 pm

If there is one word to sum up Stardock’s CEO, it’s entitled.

Matthias, I think I agree with your assessment of how this all started. Although it seems more like someone uttering death threats, and then stalking, rather than just getting angry.

To me it appears that - early on - F&P’s responses have mostly been dismissive. Stardock’s CEO does not appear handle rejection well.

BTW, thanks for the links Elestan. Your comments are very insightful.

User avatar
Death 999
ZFP Peacekeeper
Posts: 1700
Joined: Wed Mar 17, 2010 2:07 pm

Re: Sequels strife

Post by Death 999 » Sun Feb 24, 2019 5:41 pm

Draxas wrote:
Tue Feb 19, 2019 6:03 pm
krulle wrote:
Thu Feb 14, 2019 6:53 pm
Pity that the content of whatever discover material has been handed over falls under non-dislosure requirements...
Otherwise they could outsource sifting through e-mails to "us"....
Unless you (and the rest of us) are a lawyer, this would be a BAD idea. The concept of legal importance in any document, especially something as typically transient as an email, is very difficult to ascertain even for lawyers, never mind laypeople. For example, at my job, we are told to retain any documents or emails that might even be peripherally related when a subject becomes the topic of a legal hold. But we are only saving these items so they are not inadvertently deleted, it is the counsel's job to go through and determine what, if anything, is relevant. Trying to make that sort of judgment call, especially without having all of the details of an ongoing case, is nigh impossible without a legal background, and may whatever deity you believe in help you if you destroy something important, even inadvertently. The penalties for that are quite stiff.

If they did it right, it could be not such a terrible idea. It would take a fair amount of work to set up, though.

krulle
Ilwrath torturer
Posts: 464
Joined: Wed Jan 11, 2017 1:01 pm

Re: Sequels strife

Post by krulle » Sun Mar 03, 2019 8:38 am

I also meant th base work like tagging emails to certain topics, so that the lawyers can shift throug a certain topic without going through all emails, but only through those touching a certain topic.
The difficulty would be setting up a relevant classification, like how detailed the "topics" are without losing overview, and still being detailed enough to avoid an information overflow when sifting though the topic...

User avatar
Borgie
Hunam adventurer
Posts: 11
Joined: Sun Feb 17, 2019 9:23 pm

Re: Sequels strife

Post by Borgie » Sun Mar 03, 2019 1:51 pm

I've always thought the idea of crowdsourcing was really cool for any purpose.

I’ve often wondered how the information is verified. This is the perfect situation for opposing parties to inject false information. But maybe that could be handled by redundancy of volunteers.

I like the idea of tagging a whole email though, as it seems to alleviate some of the required legal skill.

I may not be able to help in this task, but what I can do; if more Stardock “tactics” are used, I may donate more to the P&F fund (another type of crowdsourcing).

Post Reply