Quantcast

Howdy, Stranger!

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

Take Two Lawsuit Shuts Down PC Port of Red Dead Redemption - MMORPG.com

SystemSystem Member UncommonPosts: 5,023
edited December 2019 in News & Features Discussion

imageTake Two Lawsuit Shuts Down PC Port of Red Dead Redemption - MMORPG.com

Unlike Red Dead Redemption 2, the first game never made it to PC. However, that doesn't mean people have tried to port it, and subsequently gotten shut down by Take-Two.

Read the full story here


«1

Comments

  • rojoArcueidrojoArcueid Member EpicPosts: 10,409
    edited December 2019
    half a million dollars in damages... what damages? It's a 9 1/2 year old game and they were doing nothing with it. They sure as hell weren't making money on it either.

    Sure they have the right to cancel unofficial ports of their IP, but there is zero damages caused by this. They wanted to file lawsuits instead of taking a more cost effective approach, that cost is on themselves IMO.
    Whiteshade92klash2defGdemamiNycteliosdragonlee66RhoklawPalebaneHidekiNomuraHuntrezzmaskedweaseland 3 others.




  • TillerTiller Member EpicPosts: 8,876
    Well it's their fault for not porting it; they could have made the money themselves.
    KyleranGdemamidragonlee66PalebaneHidekiNomuraHuntrezzLark3mOscar1230
    SWG Bloodfin vet
    Elder Jedi/Elder Bounty Hunter

  • cloudacvcloudacv Member UncommonPosts: 208
    edited December 2019


    half a million dollars in damages... what damages? It's a 9 1/2 year old game and they were doing nothing with it. They sure as hell weren't making money on it either.



    Sure they have the right to cancel unofficial ports of their IP, but there is zero damages caused by this. They wanted to file lawsuits instead of taking a more cost effective approach, that cost is on themselves IMO.



    They broke the law and used their intellectual property as their own. How is that zero damage?
    dragonlee66RhoklawHuntrezzcheebaLark3mOscar1230
  • rojoArcueidrojoArcueid Member EpicPosts: 10,409
    edited December 2019
    cloudacv said:


    half a million dollars in damages... what damages? It's a 9 1/2 year old game and they were doing nothing with it. They sure as hell weren't making money on it either.



    Sure they have the right to cancel unofficial ports of their IP, but there is zero damages caused by this. They wanted to file lawsuits instead of taking a more cost effective approach, that cost is on themselves IMO.



    They broke the law and used their intellectual property as their own. How is that zero damage?

    where is the damage though? That's what i'm saying. Take Two have the rights to protect their IP, but the other guy didn't cause them any damage. They call it damages so they can make money off the situation. They weren't losing money because of that port, and they weren't making any money on a decade old game stuck on last gen unsupported consoles.

    EDIT: If they really wanted to sue somebody over illegitimate copies of RDR1 they would have started with last gen consoles themselves. I don't know a single person who bought the game there, all of them had a hacked version on XB360.
    GdemamiXodicNycteliosdragonlee66PalebaneHuntrezzLark3mOscar1230




  • cloudacvcloudacv Member UncommonPosts: 208



    cloudacv said:





    half a million dollars in damages... what damages? It's a 9 1/2 year old game and they were doing nothing with it. They sure as hell weren't making money on it either.





    Sure they have the right to cancel unofficial ports of their IP, but there is zero damages caused by this. They wanted to file lawsuits instead of taking a more cost effective approach, that cost is on themselves IMO.






    They broke the law and used their intellectual property as their own. How is that zero damage?



    where is the damage though? That's what i'm saying. Take Two have the rights to protect their IP, but the other guy didn't cause them any damage. They call it damages so they can make money off the situation. They weren't losing money because of that port, and they weren't making any money on a decade old game stuck on last gen unsupported consoles.


    Did you read the article? “ distribute unauthorized software files that would dramatically change the content of Take-Two’s video games.” that is damages and the lawsuit is justified.
    dragonlee66HuntrezzcheebaLark3mOscar1230
  • ArteriusArterius Member EpicPosts: 2,840
    Wow. Hope Take-Two wins that one. Guy deserves to lose every penny. Don't steal, pure and simple, and then distribute it. Common sense. You wouldn't do it for a Movie or TV show and expect anything different if the hammer were to fall.
    cloudacvdragonlee66Huntrezzcheeba
    Currently playing: Outer Worlds (Xbox One X)

    Currently Reading: Skaven Slayer (Gotrek and Felix Book 2)

    Currently Writing: Champions of Legend Book 1 (3rd Draft)

    Currently Watching: Oz (Season 4), Soprano's (Season 1)


  • rojoArcueidrojoArcueid Member EpicPosts: 10,409
    cloudacv said:



    cloudacv said:





    half a million dollars in damages... what damages? It's a 9 1/2 year old game and they were doing nothing with it. They sure as hell weren't making money on it either.





    Sure they have the right to cancel unofficial ports of their IP, but there is zero damages caused by this. They wanted to file lawsuits instead of taking a more cost effective approach, that cost is on themselves IMO.






    They broke the law and used their intellectual property as their own. How is that zero damage?



    where is the damage though? That's what i'm saying. Take Two have the rights to protect their IP, but the other guy didn't cause them any damage. They call it damages so they can make money off the situation. They weren't losing money because of that port, and they weren't making any money on a decade old game stuck on last gen unsupported consoles.


    Did you read the article? “ distribute unauthorized software files that would dramatically change the content of Take-Two’s video games.” that is damages and the lawsuit is justified.

    so if it didn't dramatically change the content it would have been acceptable although it's still unauthorized distribution? That charge is suspiciously worded like a trap. If the guy intended to make money on it then i'd be OK with the lawsuit. If he wasn't then i just think it's absurd.

    Just my opinion. Take Two never did anything against all the people who hacked XB360s to pirate RDR1 there.
    XodicNycteliosdragonlee66HuntrezzLark3mOscar1230




  • klash2defklash2def Member EpicPosts: 1,756
    Rstar should let us play through the entire RDR campaign in RDR2 Engine. Just let us continue the story after Artur dies. Most of the game map is in there, just unlock Mexico. 
    Palebane
    "PSA: We live in a multicultural world. Nobody is "forcing" diversity. Earth is already Diverse."

    "Everything that happens is a political act, and the only people that get to pretend otherwise are those privileged enough to not have politics impact them at all." ~Taliesin

    "What does it mean to be human? In a time when people's humanity is perennially called into question?"
    - Dr. Cornell West
     
    Currently: Games Audio Engineer
    You've heard what I've heard


  • cloudacvcloudacv Member UncommonPosts: 208



    cloudacv said:







    cloudacv said:








    half a million dollars in damages... what damages? It's a 9 1/2 year old game and they were doing nothing with it. They sure as hell weren't making money on it either.







    Sure they have the right to cancel unofficial ports of their IP, but there is zero damages caused by this. They wanted to file lawsuits instead of taking a more cost effective approach, that cost is on themselves IMO.









    They broke the law and used their intellectual property as their own. How is that zero damage?





    where is the damage though? That's what i'm saying. Take Two have the rights to protect their IP, but the other guy didn't cause them any damage. They call it damages so they can make money off the situation. They weren't losing money because of that port, and they weren't making any money on a decade old game stuck on last gen unsupported consoles.




    Did you read the article? “ distribute unauthorized software files that would dramatically change the content of Take-Two’s video games.” that is damages and the lawsuit is justified.




    so if it didn't dramatically change the content it would have been acceptable although it's still unauthorized distribution? That charge is suspiciously worded like a trap. If the guy intended to make money on it then i'd be OK with the lawsuit. If he wasn't then i just think it's absurd.

    Just my opinion. Take Two never did anything against all the people who hacked XB360s to pirate RDR1 there.



    I don’t think you understand how the law works. Just porting the game alone is enough grounds for a lawsuit. That is dramatic changes to the game without their consent. What if the game doesn’t work right? It doesn’t matter how old the game is. As long as they still own the rights they are completely within their power to sue them.
    How exactly was take two supposed to enforce people cracking a system they have nothing to do with? Two completely different things.
    RexKushmanHuntrezzcheebaLark3mOscar1230
  • rojoArcueidrojoArcueid Member EpicPosts: 10,409
    edited December 2019
    cloudacv said:



    cloudacv said:







    cloudacv said:








    half a million dollars in damages... what damages? It's a 9 1/2 year old game and they were doing nothing with it. They sure as hell weren't making money on it either.







    Sure they have the right to cancel unofficial ports of their IP, but there is zero damages caused by this. They wanted to file lawsuits instead of taking a more cost effective approach, that cost is on themselves IMO.









    They broke the law and used their intellectual property as their own. How is that zero damage?





    where is the damage though? That's what i'm saying. Take Two have the rights to protect their IP, but the other guy didn't cause them any damage. They call it damages so they can make money off the situation. They weren't losing money because of that port, and they weren't making any money on a decade old game stuck on last gen unsupported consoles.




    Did you read the article? “ distribute unauthorized software files that would dramatically change the content of Take-Two’s video games.” that is damages and the lawsuit is justified.




    so if it didn't dramatically change the content it would have been acceptable although it's still unauthorized distribution? That charge is suspiciously worded like a trap. If the guy intended to make money on it then i'd be OK with the lawsuit. If he wasn't then i just think it's absurd.

    Just my opinion. Take Two never did anything against all the people who hacked XB360s to pirate RDR1 there.



    I don’t think you understand how the law works. Just porting the game alone is enough grounds for a lawsuit. That is dramatic changes to the game without their consent. What if the game doesn’t work right? It doesn’t matter how old the game is. As long as they still own the rights they are completely within their power to sue them.
    How exactly was take two supposed to enforce people cracking a system they have nothing to do with? Two completely different things.

    because it's their intellectual property. If they are going to fight an unauthorized port to PC which they have nothing to do with either since they didn't port it themselves, then they should have fought unauthorized distributions on platforms they did work with. At that time they were making money on last gen consoles. At this time they aren't on PC. It just feels like an excuse to make some money while they develop another game.

    I'm not saying they should ignore this stuff, just saying i think they are over reacting.
    Huntrezz




  • cloudacvcloudacv Member UncommonPosts: 208



    cloudacv said:







    cloudacv said:











    cloudacv said:











    half a million dollars in damages... what damages? It's a 9 1/2 year old game and they were doing nothing with it. They sure as hell weren't making money on it either.









    Sure they have the right to cancel unofficial ports of their IP, but there is zero damages caused by this. They wanted to file lawsuits instead of taking a more cost effective approach, that cost is on themselves IMO.












    They broke the law and used their intellectual property as their own. How is that zero damage?







    where is the damage though? That's what i'm saying. Take Two have the rights to protect their IP, but the other guy didn't cause them any damage. They call it damages so they can make money off the situation. They weren't losing money because of that port, and they weren't making any money on a decade old game stuck on last gen unsupported consoles.






    Did you read the article? “ distribute unauthorized software files that would dramatically change the content of Take-Two’s video games.” that is damages and the lawsuit is justified.







    so if it didn't dramatically change the content it would have been acceptable although it's still unauthorized distribution? That charge is suspiciously worded like a trap. If the guy intended to make money on it then i'd be OK with the lawsuit. If he wasn't then i just think it's absurd.

    Just my opinion. Take Two never did anything against all the people who hacked XB360s to pirate RDR1 there.






    I don’t think you understand how the law works. Just porting the game alone is enough grounds for a lawsuit. That is dramatic changes to the game without their consent. What if the game doesn’t work right? It doesn’t matter how old the game is. As long as they still own the rights they are completely within their power to sue them.

    How exactly was take two supposed to enforce people cracking a system they have nothing to do with? Two completely different things.



    because it's their intellectual property. If they are going to fight an unauthorized port to PC which they have nothing to do with either since they didn't port it themselves, then they should have fought unauthorized distributions on platforms they did work with. At that time they were making money on last gen consoles. At this time they aren't on PC. It just feels like an excuse to make some money while they develop another game.

    I'm not saying they should ignore this stuff, just saying i think they are over reacting.


    You are delusional. That’s not how it works. They have no power over what happens to a cracked Xbox. They have no control over that period. They do however have power in this situation because they know exactly who is doing it and what they are doing.
    You need to read the article. They gave him ample time by the sounds of it to take it down but he was far too busy with “life” stuff.
    Huntrezz
  • XiaokiXiaoki Member RarePosts: 3,358
    These people were stupid for even trying this.

    Rockstar will even threaten legal action to shut down graphics mods for GTA games.

    Messing with Rockstar games on PC is just begging to be sued.
    Kyleran
  • Panther2103Panther2103 Member EpicPosts: 5,569
    cloudacv said:



    cloudacv said:







    cloudacv said:








    half a million dollars in damages... what damages? It's a 9 1/2 year old game and they were doing nothing with it. They sure as hell weren't making money on it either.







    Sure they have the right to cancel unofficial ports of their IP, but there is zero damages caused by this. They wanted to file lawsuits instead of taking a more cost effective approach, that cost is on themselves IMO.









    They broke the law and used their intellectual property as their own. How is that zero damage?





    where is the damage though? That's what i'm saying. Take Two have the rights to protect their IP, but the other guy didn't cause them any damage. They call it damages so they can make money off the situation. They weren't losing money because of that port, and they weren't making any money on a decade old game stuck on last gen unsupported consoles.




    Did you read the article? “ distribute unauthorized software files that would dramatically change the content of Take-Two’s video games.” that is damages and the lawsuit is justified.




    so if it didn't dramatically change the content it would have been acceptable although it's still unauthorized distribution? That charge is suspiciously worded like a trap. If the guy intended to make money on it then i'd be OK with the lawsuit. If he wasn't then i just think it's absurd.

    Just my opinion. Take Two never did anything against all the people who hacked XB360s to pirate RDR1 there.



    I don’t think you understand how the law works. Just porting the game alone is enough grounds for a lawsuit. That is dramatic changes to the game without their consent. What if the game doesn’t work right? It doesn’t matter how old the game is. As long as they still own the rights they are completely within their power to sue them.
    How exactly was take two supposed to enforce people cracking a system they have nothing to do with? Two completely different things.

    because it's their intellectual property. If they are going to fight an unauthorized port to PC which they have nothing to do with either since they didn't port it themselves, then they should have fought unauthorized distributions on platforms they did work with. At that time they were making money on last gen consoles. At this time they aren't on PC. It just feels like an excuse to make some money while they develop another game.

    I'm not saying they should ignore this stuff, just saying i think they are over reacting.
    There's a major difference in porting their IP / entire game to a different system and distributing it, and people having the ability to pirate it on something that already exists. 
  • KyleranKyleran Member LegendaryPosts: 36,357
    half a million dollars in damages... what damages? It's a 9 1/2 year old game and they were doing nothing with it. They sure as hell weren't making money on it either.

    Sure they have the right to cancel unofficial ports of their IP, but there is zero damages caused by this. They wanted to file lawsuits instead of taking a more cost effective approach, that cost is on themselves IMO.
    Have to try and recover the legal fees, half a million is chump change. 

    "See normal people, I'm not one of them" | G-Easy & Big Sean

    "I need to finish" - Christian Wolff: The Accountant

    Just trying to live long enough to play a new, released MMORPG, playing FO76 at the moment.

    Fools find no pleasure in understanding, but delight in airing their own opinions. Pvbs 18:2, NIV

    Don't just play games, inhabit virtual worlds™

    "This is the most intelligent, well qualified and articulate response to a post I have ever seen on these forums. It's a shame most people here won't have the attention span to read past the second line." - Anon






  • PartieplayinPartieplayin Member UncommonPosts: 90
    edited December 2019
    There should be a new law. If your game can not be played on a system that is currently available in retail or online stores in a brand new fully functional state all online features included. Then you can not sue for damages or anything else because you are no longer making money on that game in a retail fashion.. as long as you are not making a profit off of the distribution of the digital property. Just my opinion but sueing over 25-30 yr old ROMs is rediculious and needs to be stopped, or else devolupers should be required to support that game on currently available hardware someone can buy at a retail store so people have legal avenues to obtain and play the game without having to go second hand shopping.
    WhiteLanternangerbeaverPalebaneHuntrezz
  • XodicXodic Member EpicPosts: 1,138
    "Planning" to distribute doesn't warrant compensation damages outside of the time and money spent to halt it through legal action. Which is completely justifiable.

    "Planning" to distribute doesn't warrant punitive damages, at all.

    I got my law degree at Costco, so I'm pretty sure I'm right.
    PalebaneHidekiNomuraHuntrezzLark3m
  • rojoArcueidrojoArcueid Member EpicPosts: 10,409
    edited December 2019

    cloudacv said:



    You are delusional. That’s not how it works. They have no power over what happens to a cracked Xbox. They have no control over that period. They do however have power in this situation because they know exactly who is doing it and what they are doing.

    You need to read the article. They gave him ample time by the sounds of it to take it down but he was far too busy with “life” stuff.




    As i stated above, it's my opinion. I'm not trying to tell them how to do their job. They don't make money from me anyway.
    Huntrezz




  • AeanderAeander Member LegendaryPosts: 5,946
    cloudacv said:


    half a million dollars in damages... what damages? It's a 9 1/2 year old game and they were doing nothing with it. They sure as hell weren't making money on it either.



    Sure they have the right to cancel unofficial ports of their IP, but there is zero damages caused by this. They wanted to file lawsuits instead of taking a more cost effective approach, that cost is on themselves IMO.



    They broke the law and used their intellectual property as their own. How is that zero damage?

    where is the damage though? That's what i'm saying. Take Two have the rights to protect their IP, but the other guy didn't cause them any damage. They call it damages so they can make money off the situation. They weren't losing money because of that port, and they weren't making any money on a decade old game stuck on last gen unsupported consoles.

    EDIT: If they really wanted to sue somebody over illegitimate copies of RDR1 they would have started with last gen consoles themselves. I don't know a single person who bought the game there, all of them had a hacked version on XB360.
    Answer - with free unofficial ports of RDR1, potential customers may play that while they hold off for a sale of RDR2.
  • H0urg1assH0urg1ass Member EpicPosts: 2,380
    If you don't put it on PC, then I don't buy it at all.

    I don't slum it in isotonic zero-order controller land, so they weren't making money on me to begin with, and that sucks for them cause I'm huge fan of westerns and would kill for a good western PC game. 

    Believe me, I've looked, there just aren't any.

    Desperados III was supposed to come out this year, and it looks fantastic, but seeing as it hasn't released yet and 2019 will slip through our fingers in less than two days... I don't see them making their release target.
    AeanderPartieplayin
  • NycteliosNyctelios Member EpicPosts: 3,818
    Well. If I was a big company and somone made anything with my game/engine the first thing I would think is to hire that person to make legally things for me.

    Most modders are people with passion for their projects and some of them got hired because of it.

    Some companies like to shutt down things like that, like nintendo and the Metroid 2 remake that remains on my computer as a remainder that talent sometimes is somewhere unknown.

    Some companies learn with it, like SEGA, who turned the projects something legal and got money from it.

    Rockstar is doing something legal... still quite shitty, tho. And that's my opinion.
    Palebane
    Steam ID Discord ID: Night # 6102 - GoG ID - 

    Current playing: 
    Final Fantasy XIV: A Realm Reborn - Shadowbringers; EvE Online

    "There is a fine line between consideration and hesitation. The former is wisdom, the latter is fear." Izaro Phrecius, Holy Emperor of the Eternal Empire, Last of Royal Phrecius Family.
  • KnaveSkyeKnaveSkye Member UncommonPosts: 137
    "Unlike Red Dead Redemption 2, the first game never made it to PC. However, that doesn’t mean people have tried to port it, and subsequently gotten shut down by Take-Two."

    I re-read this way too many times trying to make it work...but it just doesn't. You said it never made it to PC, and that doesn't mean people tried to port it and got shut down.
    Alternately, you said "However, that does mean people haven't tried to port it, and subsequently gotten shut down by Take-Two."
  • WBadgerWBadger Member UncommonPosts: 334
    There should be a new law. If your game can not be played on a system that is currently available in retail or online stores in a brand new fully functional state all online features included. Then you can not sue for damages or anything else because you are no longer making money on that game in a retail fashion.. as long as you are not making a profit off of the distribution of the digital property. Just my opinion but sueing over 25-30 yr old ROMs is rediculious and needs to be stopped, or else devolupers should be required to support that game on currently available hardware someone can buy at a retail store so people have legal avenues to obtain and play the game without having to go second hand shopping.
    That is such a horrible take.  "If people stop buying your game then the company no longer has the right to sue if someone tries to appropriate your intellectual property."

    Nope, it's still their intellectual property.  It's their right to decide whether or not a game makes it to a specific console or piece of hardware.  Nobody has the right to forcibly take an IP and port it to their system of choice without the IP holder's permission.  
  • Asm0deusAsm0deus Member EpicPosts: 3,227

    cloudacv said:







    cloudacv said:








    half a million dollars in damages... what damages? It's a 9 1/2 year old game and they were doing nothing with it. They sure as hell weren't making money on it either.







    Sure they have the right to cancel unofficial ports of their IP, but there is zero damages caused by this. They wanted to file lawsuits instead of taking a more cost effective approach, that cost is on themselves IMO.









    They broke the law and used their intellectual property as their own. How is that zero damage?





    where is the damage though? That's what i'm saying. Take Two have the rights to protect their IP, but the other guy didn't cause them any damage. They call it damages so they can make money off the situation. They weren't losing money because of that port, and they weren't making any money on a decade old game stuck on last gen unsupported consoles.




    Did you read the article? “ distribute unauthorized software files that would dramatically change the content of Take-Two’s video games.” that is damages and the lawsuit is justified.




    Did the project ever seee the light of day though? From what I read in the OP nothing was ever released, the guy being sued canned the project so how can there be damages?
    Lark3m

    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.





  • Jamar870Jamar870 Member UncommonPosts: 457
    What they should really do is bring the length of time for copyright back to where it started.  Its damn insane the length of time they have now.
    PalebaneAsm0deus
  • Asm0deusAsm0deus Member EpicPosts: 3,227
    edited December 2019
    Okay color me confused but from what I am seeing in the gtaforums this isn't even a port but rather a texture mod?

    I still find it insane that they are gunning after him over a texture mod because THEY think it's something different (They BELIEVE it's a fan port and that it will affect Red Dead Online), and yet there's no way at all to reason with them, it's a damn texture mod, nothing illegal is happening, this is exactly like FiveM back when Take-Two and Rockstar were saying it was promoting piracy of GTAV, it pretty much seems like they can outright lie about a project and then just throw their legal team on it to ruin a persons life. I was hoping that this one not backing down MIGHT make someone up there notice that hey, this isn't at all what we're accusing it of, but nope, instead we have mods and admins on this forum gloating about Take-Two going after him and victim blaming saying it's his fault, hey, gotta stay in their good books right?


    What makes it worse is that in theory they should be going after Xenia and RPCS3 if they're so worried about Red Dead Redemption being playable but they're not, because they've got the wrong end of the stick! We as a community should be helping to make this clear that this is just a f*cking texture mod and there is nothing wrong about that, I don't like John that much but damn he's not in the wrong in terms of what the project is doing and yet we have staff like @Spider-Vice and @Jason sitting around going "Well it's your own fault, should've listened to daddy Take-Two.

    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.





Sign In or Register to comment.