›

Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!

Sign In Register

Quick Links

First Elder Scrolls Online and now this?!?!?!?!?! Screw Zenimax

EpicentEpicent Member UncommonPosts: 648
in General Gaming
This is ridiculous. Seriously. Rift does good and now they try to cash in? Guess they have to make money some kind of way. http://www.ign.com/articles/2014/05/01/oculus-rift-technology-was-stolen-company-claims
«1345678

Comments

  • zevianzevian Member UncommonPosts: 403
    I guess we know where that box sale money went :P
  • TealaTeala Member RarePosts: 7,627
    Well the game isn't selling all that well.   How else can they make back the cost of development which some estimate to be over $250 million. 
  • ThornrageThornrage Member UncommonPosts: 659
    Since Zenimax tried to settle before the Facebook buyout, would think they might have more of leg to stand on here than you are accepting.

    "I don't give a sh*t what other people say. I play what I like and I'll pay to do it too!" - SerialMMOist

  • EpicentEpicent Member UncommonPosts: 648
    Originally posted by Thornrage
    Since Zenimax tried to settle before the Facebook buyout, would think they might have more of leg to stand on here than you are accepting.

    Even so, if I were on that jury i would vote jury nullification because even if they do have legal standing I highly question the moral basis of the law. Not sure if a jury would be involved in this but even so thats my take on it.

  • RabidMouthRabidMouth Member Posts: 196
    Originally posted by Thornrage
    Since Zenimax tried to settle before the Facebook buyout, would think they might have more of leg to stand on here than you are accepting.

    Not saying you making stuff up, but do you have a source? I can only find stuff on the current case. Granted I only checked the first 3 pages on google :)

    You can't reason someone out of a position they didn't reason themselves into.

  • bcbullybcbully Member EpicPosts: 11,838
    Wow I think this is pretty big.
    "We see fundamentals and we ape in"
  • kitaradkitarad Member LegendaryPosts: 7,910
    This is going to get really nasty.

  • HorusraHorusra Member EpicPosts: 4,411
    Originally posted by Epicent
    Originally posted by Thornrage
    Since Zenimax tried to settle before the Facebook buyout, would think they might have more of leg to stand on here than you are accepting.

    Even so, if I were on that jury i would vote jury nullification because even if they do have legal standing I highly question the moral basis of the law. Not sure if a jury would be involved in this but even so thats my take on it.

    So...even if they had the law on their side you would vote no....hope that applies when you are before a judge for something.

  • BeansnBreadBeansnBread Member EpicPosts: 7,254
    It seems like a perfect time for Zenimax to take on some negative publicity.
  • NephelaiNephelai Member UncommonPosts: 185
    Carmack is one of the most fair and honourable people around - that allegation is a joke. Back in his idSoftware days (before Zenimax owned them) he used to charge for games to a certain profitability level and then make them free after which he would release the source code. No person or Company has ever done that since. Everyone nowadays bleeds the customer out.
  • asmkm22asmkm22 Member Posts: 1,788

    If you read into the facts a bit, their actions makes sense.  Basically, what happened was:

    1.  He worked for Zenimax on VR tech.

    2.  Left Zenimax to work on OR, which is VR tech.

    3.  Zenimax is now claiming he has violated trade secret laws.

     

     

    They actually have a case here, especially if part of his termination contract prohibited from doing certain things like this.  Or you guys can just assume it's a case of a big bad company looking to screw over the little guy (owned by Facebook, no less).

    You make me like charity

  • EpicentEpicent Member UncommonPosts: 648
    Originally posted by Horusra
    Originally posted by Epicent
    Originally posted by Thornrage
    Since Zenimax tried to settle before the Facebook buyout, would think they might have more of leg to stand on here than you are accepting.

    Even so, if I were on that jury i would vote jury nullification because even if they do have legal standing I highly question the moral basis of the law. Not sure if a jury would be involved in this but even so thats my take on it.

    So...even if they had the law on their side you would vote no....hope that applies when you are before a judge for something.

    If the  law is unethical......perhaps you should look up jury nullification and its meaning before commenting.

  • ThornrageThornrage Member UncommonPosts: 659
    Originally posted by CowboyHat
    Originally posted by Thornrage
    Since Zenimax tried to settle before the Facebook buyout, would think they might have more of leg to stand on here than you are accepting.

    Not saying you making stuff up, but do you have a source? I can only find stuff on the current case. Granted I only checked the first 3 pages on google :)

    http://www.gamespot.com/articles/report-elder-scrolls-parent-company-seeking-compensation-for-oculus-rift-headset-oculus-calls-claims-ridiculous/1100-6419351/

    "Finally, The Wall Street Journal says ZeniMax began seeking compensation for this intellectual property in August 2012, according to sources. Negotiations were reportedly held--on and off--for a period of about six months, and Oculus apparently even offered ZeniMax a "small equity stake." However, no deal was ever reached, sources said."

     

    "I don't give a sh*t what other people say. I play what I like and I'll pay to do it too!" - SerialMMOist

  • kitaradkitarad Member LegendaryPosts: 7,910
    Originally posted by CowboyHat
    Originally posted by Thornrage
    Since Zenimax tried to settle before the Facebook buyout, would think they might have more of leg to stand on here than you are accepting.

    Not saying you making stuff up, but do you have a source? I can only find stuff on the current case. Granted I only checked the first 3 pages on google :)

    Later that same year, ZeniMax and Oculus started ultimately unsuccessful negotiations for ZeniMax to get compensation or equity stake for the Oculus IP.

     

    That's in the linked article. Lots of times people negotiate to avoid expensive lawsuits it does not necessarily mean Zen has a claim .It just means they negotiated  because it was cheaper to get a settlement IMO. 

     

    Bloody cheap stunt by Zenimax.

     

    Was there an agreement when he left that he cannot work in the same technology or in competition if there wasn't there is no case.

  • Lazarus71Lazarus71 Member UncommonPosts: 1,081
    Here we go........

    No signature, I don't have a pen

  • ThornrageThornrage Member UncommonPosts: 659
    Originally posted by DMKano
    Originally posted by Thornrage
    Since Zenimax tried to settle before the Facebook buyout, would think they might have more of leg to stand on here than you are accepting.

    Chances of this going in Zenimax favor - zero.

    All this will do is get them negative publicity of a greedy company, again something that gamers despise.

    Zenimax needs to decide if they want to be a media company or a patent troll company.

    Sadly with this lawsuit, its clear where their priorities are,

    Personally I do not know the in and outs of all of this, I just know that Zenimax has been trying to settle this for over a year. I wouldn't think they would do it for just a money grab as someone here is suggesting.

    "I don't give a sh*t what other people say. I play what I like and I'll pay to do it too!" - SerialMMOist

  • asmkm22asmkm22 Member Posts: 1,788
    Originally posted by DMKano
    Originally posted by Thornrage
    Since Zenimax tried to settle before the Facebook buyout, would think they might have more of leg to stand on here than you are accepting.

    Chances of this going in Zenimax favor - zero.

    All this will do is get them negative publicity of a greedy company, again something that gamers despise.

    Zenimax needs to decide if they want to be a media company or a patent troll company.

    Sadly with this lawsuit, its clear where their priorities are,

    This has nothing to do with patents.

    You make me like charity

  • EpicentEpicent Member UncommonPosts: 648
    Originally posted by Thornrage
    Originally posted by DMKano
    Originally posted by Thornrage
    Since Zenimax tried to settle before the Facebook buyout, would think they might have more of leg to stand on here than you are accepting.

    Chances of this going in Zenimax favor - zero.

    All this will do is get them negative publicity of a greedy company, again something that gamers despise.

    Zenimax needs to decide if they want to be a media company or a patent troll company.

    Sadly with this lawsuit, its clear where their priorities are,

    Personally I do not know the in and outs of all of this, I just know that Zenimax has been trying to settle this for over a year. I wouldn't think they would do it for just a money grab as someone here is suggesting.

    I agree.......because we all know they aren't about  money grabbing. Like selling box sets then charging a sub then requiring you to upgrade for basic content on a game such as classes that should be included in normal box priceing.

  • kitaradkitarad Member LegendaryPosts: 7,910
    If they had something they should have done what Steve Jobs did patent everything including rounded corners. If you do not patent it while you had a chance it will be almost impossible to prove unless it is very very alike. If it was they would have settled. This means Zenimax has no leg to stand on.

  • HorusraHorusra Member EpicPosts: 4,411
    Originally posted by Epicent
    Originally posted by Horusra
    Originally posted by Epicent
    Originally posted by Thornrage
    Since Zenimax tried to settle before the Facebook buyout, would think they might have more of leg to stand on here than you are accepting.

    Even so, if I were on that jury i would vote jury nullification because even if they do have legal standing I highly question the moral basis of the law. Not sure if a jury would be involved in this but even so thats my take on it.

    So...even if they had the law on their side you would vote no....hope that applies when you are before a judge for something.

    If the  law is unethical......perhaps you should look up jury nullification and its meaning before commenting.

    1 jury nullification is for criminal trials where the defendant is guilty, but the jury does not believe the punishment or the law is written fairly.

    2 I see nothing in the article that is of questionable morals...The question is did he take the tech he developed while an employee of Zen and use it to start another company.  If anyone's morals are inquestion it is the ex-employee.

  • kitaradkitarad Member LegendaryPosts: 7,910
    If he says not a single line of code he sounds pretty confident. Zenimax has to prove it. The burden of proof is on Zenimax.

  • HorusraHorusra Member EpicPosts: 4,411
    Originally posted by DMKano
    Originally posted by kitarad
    Originally posted by CowboyHat
    Originally posted by Thornrage
    Since Zenimax tried to settle before the Facebook buyout, would think they might have more of leg to stand on here than you are accepting.

    Not saying you making stuff up, but do you have a source? I can only find stuff on the current case. Granted I only checked the first 3 pages on google :)

    Later that same year, ZeniMax and Oculus started ultimately unsuccessful negotiations for ZeniMax to get compensation or equity stake for the Oculus IP.

     

    That's in the linked article. Lots of times people negotiate to avoid expensive lawsuits it does not necessarily mean Zen has a claim .It just means they negotiated  because it was cheaper to get a settlement IMO. 

     

    Bloody cheap stunt by Zenimax.

     

    Was there an agreement when he left that he cannot work in the same technology or in competition if there wasn't there is no case.

    If Occulus never got sold for 2billion, there would be no lawsuit period.

    Anyone who believes differently.... lol

    If the Mitsubishi 3000 had not been a hit, Chevy would have never sued over their Corvette engine designer taking the engine to Mits...and then we would still have Mistu 3000's today.  No one sues if you are not going to get money.

  • ThornrageThornrage Member UncommonPosts: 659
    Originally posted by Epicent
    Originally posted by Thornrage
    Originally posted by DMKano
    Originally posted by Thornrage
    Since Zenimax tried to settle before the Facebook buyout, would think they might have more of leg to stand on here than you are accepting.

    Chances of this going in Zenimax favor - zero.

    All this will do is get them negative publicity of a greedy company, again something that gamers despise.

    Zenimax needs to decide if they want to be a media company or a patent troll company.

    Sadly with this lawsuit, its clear where their priorities are,

    Personally I do not know the in and outs of all of this, I just know that Zenimax has been trying to settle this for over a year. I wouldn't think they would do it for just a money grab as someone here is suggesting.

    I agree.......because we all know they aren't about  money grabbing. Like selling box sets then charging a sub then requiring you to upgrade for basic content on a game such as classes that should be included in normal box priceing.

    Great. this dumb argument again. I remember when ALL MMOs sold a box and held a sub for players to play. Just because F2P has crept into this genre, you think no one is allowed to do it anymore.

    Your hate for ESO is blinding you. Whatever, I don't care, I wont get into an argument with your type as I am just tired of hearing the same old sad story.

    Good luck with your negativity. I will continue to enjoy what I consider one of the most fun MMOs I have played in a long time.

    "I don't give a sh*t what other people say. I play what I like and I'll pay to do it too!" - SerialMMOist

  • NadiaNadia Member UncommonPosts: 11,798

    http://www.polygon.com/2014/5/1/5671670/carmack-oculus-zenimax

    Update: John Carmack took to Twitter this afternoon to weigh in on ZeniMax's ownership claims.

    No work I have ever done has been patented. Zenimax owns the code that I wrote, but they don't own VR.

     

    sounds hazy - who knows where the wind will blow

    EQ2 fan sites

  • prowessprowess Member UncommonPosts: 169
    Originally posted by Epicent
    Originally posted by Horusra
    Originally posted by Epicent
    Originally posted by Thornrage
    Since Zenimax tried to settle before the Facebook buyout, would think they might have more of leg to stand on here than you are accepting.

    Even so, if I were on that jury i would vote jury nullification because even if they do have legal standing I highly question the moral basis of the law. Not sure if a jury would be involved in this but even so thats my take on it.

    So...even if they had the law on their side you would vote no....hope that applies when you are before a judge for something.

    If the  law is unethical......perhaps you should look up jury nullification and its meaning before commenting.

     

    I'm not sure what world you live in...  It's unethical to be paid to do work with THEIR equipment, with THEIR groundwork, in THEIR facility, and then to take that work to another company.

     

    This all depends on what kind of employment agreement Carmack had with Zenimax.

     

    The law is definitely ethical and moral.  You should always honor your contracts.

Sign In or Register to comment.