UPDATE: We have received a brief statement from Cloud Imperium Games about the recently filed legal documentation by Crytek:
From CIG…
We are aware of the Crytek complaint having been filed in the US District Court. CIG hasn’t used the CryEngine for quite some time since we switched to Amazon’s Lumberyard. This is a meritless lawsuit that we will defend vigorously against, including recovering from Crytek any costs incurred in this matter.
If CIG can prove they didn't make money while using CryEngine then they have a chance to win. That seems difficult to prove as they have been making money hand over fist since day 1.
UPDATE: We have received a brief statement from Cloud Imperium Games about the recently filed legal documentation by Crytek:
From CIG…
We are aware of the Crytek complaint having been filed in the US District Court. CIG hasn’t used the CryEngine for quite some time since we switched to Amazon’s Lumberyard. This is a meritless lawsuit that we will defend vigorously against, including recovering from Crytek any costs incurred in this matter.
"CIG hasn't used the CryEngine for quite some time"
I hope that's not the legal defense argument they intend to bring to court.
Dunno seems like crytek is just hoping for a payout but then I can't be bothered to read up on what is actually going on barring what is said in this thread.
CIG mods a certainly having a jolly ole time doing their job right now in the rectum chat and forum though!
Brenics ~ Just to point out I do believe Chris Roberts is going down as the man who cheated backers and took down crowdfunding for gaming.
This is not the first time SC has played fast and loose with copyrighted material is it?
But this time they did it to someone who can bite back.
Curious: what was the first? I can vaguely remember something, but don't recall what specific item.
As @SBFord mentioned, if the agreement reads how the doc implies it does, there seems to be at least one serious allegation (stand-alone game Crytek never gave CIG permission to use the engineer on). If the underlying facts submitted in the document are accurate, the logo thing sounds pretty serious too, as it was an integral part of the agreement for ongoing discounted licensing fees.
Using the image of an actor (or some pre-rendered art from another artist) for an in-game character model/video/portrait without permission, if I recall correctly. Can't remember the specifics.
Yeah they actually just flipped a few "character" portraits and edited them slightly it seemed.
There was also the issue of the land vehicle trailer looking an awful lot like . . Mass Effect trailer I think. . . or was it Elite Dangerous? Lazy artists more likely than direct orders to copy.
UPDATE: We have received a brief statement from Cloud Imperium Games about the recently filed legal documentation by Crytek:
From CIG…
We are aware of the Crytek complaint having been filed in the US District Court. CIG hasn’t used the CryEngine for quite some time since we switched to Amazon’s Lumberyard. This is a meritless lawsuit that we will defend vigorously against, including recovering from Crytek any costs incurred in this matter.
"CIG hasn't used the CryEngine for quite some time"
I hope that's not the legal defense argument they intend to bring to court.
Perhaps someone should tell CIGs idiot lawyers that it doesnt matter when you stopped using a graphics engine to create assets it only matters that you did you use a graphics engine to create assets.
Any assets they created during the time they were using CryEngine would be subject to this lawsuit.
And any assets they created when they switched to Lumberyard would be exempt from this lawsuit.
UPDATE: We have received a brief statement from Cloud Imperium Games about the recently filed legal documentation by Crytek:
From CIG…
We are aware of the Crytek complaint having been filed in the US District Court. CIG hasn’t used the CryEngine for quite some time since we switched to Amazon’s Lumberyard. This is a meritless lawsuit that we will defend vigorously against, including recovering from Crytek any costs incurred in this matter.
"CIG hasn't used the CryEngine for quite some time"
I hope that's not the legal defense argument they intend to bring to court.
Perhaps someone should tell CIGs idiot lawyers that it doesnt matter when you stopped using a graphics engine to create assets it only matters that you did you use a graphics engine to create assets.
Any assets they created during the time they were using CryEngine would be subject to this lawsuit.
And any assets they created when they switched to Lumberyard would be exempt from this lawsuit.
If that's true, then CIG's got roughly the past year of work on new assets that would be exempt.
So the vast majority of current game assets would not be exempt.
Well, they are going to fight Crytek on the courts as they stated, if they drop the possibility of a settlement and directly endure through courts and its costs... that is only an option if they feel they can counter their case.
So this is likely going to be a long dispute if so.
UPDATE: We have received a brief statement from Cloud Imperium Games about the recently filed legal documentation by Crytek:
From CIG…
We are aware of the Crytek complaint having been filed in the US District Court. CIG hasn’t used the CryEngine for quite some time since we switched to Amazon’s Lumberyard. This is a meritless lawsuit that we will defend vigorously against, including recovering from Crytek any costs incurred in this matter.
"CIG hasn't used the CryEngine for quite some time"
I hope that's not the legal defense argument they intend to bring to court.
Perhaps someone should tell CIGs idiot lawyers that it doesnt matter when you stopped using a graphics engine to create assets it only matters that you did you use a graphics engine to create assets.
Any assets they created during the time they were using CryEngine would be subject to this lawsuit.
And any assets they created when they switched to Lumberyard would be exempt from this lawsuit.
If that's true, then CIG's got roughly the past year of work on new assets that would be exempt.
So the vast majority of current game assets would not be exempt.
That would be my question, how long did they use the old engine before they switched and did they carry over any assets afterwards? I think someone mentioned they saw something of theirs in a Bug Smashers Video.
Lastly, why delete forum posts if it is a meritless lawsuit? Why not just say that from the start?
"We all do the best we can based on life experience, point of view, and our ability to believe in ourselves." - Naropa "We don't see things as they are, we see them as we are." SR Covey
This lawsuit reflects just as bad on Crytek as it does CIG. Are any dev studios even using Crytek anymore?
Well, Lumberyard was built off of CryEngine. In a roundabout way, CIG is still using CryEngine, but the licensing for Lumberyard is much different from what I understand and would not be included in the suit.
That would be my question, how long did they use the old engine before they switched and did they carry over any assets afterwards?
Looking at it...
- Erin Roberts stated in 2014 they outright bought the engine source and its assets, if that's the case so they don't play by a normal license, if anything by terms of the sale.
- They state they stopped pulling code from CE say on 3.7, so that would be 2 years.
The thing Erin stated early then they should have more power over CE's source if they did a buyout, just like Amazon did, that's what I'm confused about but I guess we'll have to wait and see.
Hurray for crowdfunded money being used to settle legal issues due to bad management!
That does present a whole other strand of hairy to this: if the settlement or judgement rendered does say "CIG, you folks intentionally broke the agreement and as such you owe Crytek X amount of money" ... Do backers owe that money? Should CIG and the employees responsible pony up that cash separate of backer funds?
If this does end in a settlement or judgement against CIG, it will be an important legal point for all crowdfunded projects to take note of.
Personally feel that intentionally misleading or committing acts that would create such a liability should not be assessed against the fund pool backers have contributed. If it could be reasonably decided that CIG acted out of innocent ignorance but still violated the agreement, backer money should be used to cover such settlements or judgements.
1. Backers don't owe anyone anything. They already paid when they made their purchase, and won't need to pay extra no matter what happens.
2. There is no special pool of backer money. After a backer transfers the money to CIG, it's CIG's and will be used to pay for CIG's expenses, including paying Crytek for possible damages
3. CIG's owners, managers, and employees don't need to pay anything. In some cases it's possible that owner/manager/employee must pay compensation because they've caused damages, but that's normally only when someone has committed a crime or ignored their responsibilities. Making bad decision while working - even if those decision leads to the company breaking agreements - is not serious enough that you'd need to pay for those damages personally.
I wasn't implying that backers would be required to shell puts extra cash for this. The pool I mentioned is simply the funding received, not that I think they've taken the funder money and put it in a room or account somewhere and aren't touching it. I'm saying, should the courts order CIG to pay damages, should CIG be allowed to use the funds garnered from crowdfunding to pay that (as well as the lawyer fees associated), or should CIG be expected to fund that separately?
That's why I quoted Talonsin. Should backer funding be used to support a legal defense of a company breaking contract obligations, particularly if done knowingly?
Yes. Legal expenses are also a part of the company's expenses.
If it means that RSI goes bankrupt then the situation sucks for backers, but people will just have to be careful what they back.
Yea, you're right, that seems the most likely legal position.
Would be a shame to see arrogance on CIG's part regarding licensing cause those folks to lose all their money, though, and have nothing to show for it.
Well, Lumberyard was built off of CryEngine. In a roundabout way, CIG is still using CryEngine, but the licensing for Lumberyard is much different from what I understand and would not be included in the suit.
This could also involve Amazon in the roll.
Being them under contractual nature with Amazon with Lumberyard and have them merged their updates over the past year and so with what they had, then it seems likely to me if Crytek contests authority over SC's engine that it will directly collide with CIG's contract with Amazon.
Out of curiosity, if you are an employee of a company and mess something up (e.g. use an unlicensed image) and your company gets sued for $100k, can the cost be passed on to the employee who messed up?
What if you are designing airplanes and make a mistake with a calculation and the plane crashes. Is the designer responsible, or the company?
No where near bankruptcy with all the money they's taken in so far. They could possibly do a multi million dollar settlement with few problems. IMO.
"We all do the best we can based on life experience, point of view, and our ability to believe in ourselves." - Naropa "We don't see things as they are, we see them as we are." SR Covey
Out of curiosity, if you are an employee of a company and mess something up (e.g. use an unlicensed image) and your company gets sued for $100k, can the cost be passed on to the employee who messed up?
What if you are designing airplanes and make a mistake with a calculation and the plane crashes. Is the designer responsible, or the company?
I think the blame and all punishments go to the company. Then the company would likely just fire the responsible employee. Ya'know considering it's a mistake and not intentional.
But the employee could still probably be sued in civil court or something.
Out of curiosity, if you are an employee of a company and mess something up (e.g. use an unlicensed image) and your company gets sued for $100k, can the cost be passed on to the employee who messed up?
What if you are designing airplanes and make a mistake with a calculation and the plane crashes. Is the designer responsible, or the company?
Only in very specific circumstances. Vrika and I posted about that earlier. Generally, it seems that the employer would have to prove they had no reasonable chance to prevent the damage caused by an employee acting out of turn for the liability to possibly fall on the employee.
When I create assets using my licensed copies of SolidWorks, those assets are 100% mine.
When you create assets with a licensed game engine, those assets don't belong to you?
That sounds crazy
I think that would depend on the specifics of the agreement, right? I'm not sure. The biggest exposure that jumps out at me in this is the extra game being developed. Wouldn't be a big deal, save for the fact that they are already taking in cash from consumers for both titles.
Out of curiosity, if you are an employee of a company and mess something up (e.g. use an unlicensed image) and your company gets sued for $100k, can the cost be passed on to the employee who messed up?
What if you are designing airplanes and make a mistake with a calculation and the plane crashes. Is the designer responsible, or the company?
Only in very specific circumstances. Vrika and I posted about that earlier. Generally, it seems that the employer would have to prove they had no reasonable chance to prevent the damage caused by an employee acting out of turn for the liability to possibly fall on the employee.
The employee could only be held accountable if one could prove that he/she purposely made the error.
Out of curiosity, if you are an employee of a company and mess something up (e.g. use an unlicensed image) and your company gets sued for $100k, can the cost be passed on to the employee who messed up?
What if you are designing airplanes and make a mistake with a calculation and the plane crashes. Is the designer responsible, or the company?
Its the company being sued, an employee has nothing to worry about if they didn't break any working rules. Its up to the company to make sure that individual mistakes can be prevented.
If a company design procedure is so poorly done that one person making a calculation wrong cause a plane to crash the company deserves to be sued.
Iselin: And the next person who says "but it's a business, they need to make money" can just go fuck yourself.
UPDATE: We have received a brief statement from Cloud Imperium Games about the recently filed legal documentation by Crytek:
From CIG…
We are aware of the Crytek complaint having been filed in the US District Court. CIG hasn’t used the CryEngine for quite some time since we switched to Amazon’s Lumberyard. This is a meritless lawsuit that we will defend vigorously against, including recovering from Crytek any costs incurred in this matter.
"CIG hasn't used the CryEngine for quite some time"
I hope that's not the legal defense argument they intend to bring to court.
(You can request refund any game on steam if you played for less than 2 hours.)
CIG "What? CryEngine? It's in the closet. We played with it for only 90 minutes."
Sooo... Crytek saw their potential royalty revenue vanish with CIG's move to Lumberyard, and now they're cooking up a scheme to try to claw back some money ?
Comments
If CIG can prove they didn't make money while using CryEngine then they have a chance to win. That seems difficult to prove as they have been making money hand over fist since day 1.
"CIG hasn't used the CryEngine for quite some time"
I hope that's not the legal defense argument they intend to bring to court.
CIG mods a certainly having a jolly ole time doing their job right now in the rectum chat and forum though!
Brenics ~ Just to point out I do believe Chris Roberts is going down as the man who cheated backers and took down crowdfunding for gaming.
https://www.reddit.com/r/quityourbullshit/comments/4ncg4v/video_game_company_fails_at_removing_watermark/
There was also the issue of the land vehicle trailer looking an awful lot like . . Mass Effect trailer I think. . . or was it Elite Dangerous? Lazy artists more likely than direct orders to copy.
Wa min God! Se æx on min heafod is!
Any assets they created during the time they were using CryEngine would be subject to this lawsuit.
And any assets they created when they switched to Lumberyard would be exempt from this lawsuit.
So the vast majority of current game assets would not be exempt.
So this is likely going to be a long dispute if so.
Lastly, why delete forum posts if it is a meritless lawsuit? Why not just say that from the start?
"We all do the best we can based on life experience, point of view, and our ability to believe in ourselves." - Naropa "We don't see things as they are, we see them as we are." SR Covey
- Erin Roberts stated in 2014 they outright bought the engine source and its assets, if that's the case so they don't play by a normal license, if anything by terms of the sale.
- They state they stopped pulling code from CE say on 3.7, so that would be 2 years.
The thing Erin stated early then they should have more power over CE's source if they did a buyout, just like Amazon did, that's what I'm confused about but I guess we'll have to wait and see.
Would be a shame to see arrogance on CIG's part regarding licensing cause those folks to lose all their money, though, and have nothing to show for it.
Interesting news indeed.
Being them under contractual nature with Amazon with Lumberyard and have them merged their updates over the past year and so with what they had, then it seems likely to me if Crytek contests authority over SC's engine that it will directly collide with CIG's contract with Amazon.
What if you are designing airplanes and make a mistake with a calculation and the plane crashes. Is the designer responsible, or the company?
When you create assets with a licensed game engine, those assets don't belong to you?
That sounds crazy
"Be water my friend" - Bruce Lee
"We all do the best we can based on life experience, point of view, and our ability to believe in ourselves." - Naropa "We don't see things as they are, we see them as we are." SR Covey
But the employee could still probably be sued in civil court or something.
Crowdfunding is akin to mud on the water.
"Be water my friend" - Bruce Lee
If a company design procedure is so poorly done that one person making a calculation wrong cause a plane to crash the company deserves to be sued.
CIG "What? CryEngine? It's in the closet. We played with it for only 90 minutes."
This will be entertaining...