It seems that you're using an outdated browser. Some things may not work as they should (or don't work at all).
We suggest you upgrade newer and better browser like: Chrome, Firefox, Internet Explorer or Opera

×
Community
General discussionStar Control games being removed from GOG(279 posts)(279 posts)
(279 posts)
Pages:
1
5
10
11
12
13
14
15
19
This is my favourite topic
Posted February 27, 2018
And now this: https://dogarandkazon.squarespace.com/blog/2018/2/27/report-from-planet-surface

Although I am rooting for them, I'm not sure sharing all of this is a great idea. I guess this is a counter to Brad Wardell sharing an email chain in the Stardock forums.
Posted March 19, 2018
Add that this

If this is true, what a mess. Come on Stardock...
Posted March 20, 2018
This is the best part of the dagonandkozan.com update

As we've said to you several times over the past years, we do not want Stardock to use any of our IP, and that remains our position today. To avoid consumer confusion, we must also pass on the DLC option you proposed. Despite your suggestion below, you do not have a license to use our IP. All rights to our work reverted to us long ago. You (and Atari) previously acknowledged same. Further, time and again you have asked for a new license, notwithstanding our consistent rejections. Kindly do not use our IP in your game. If already added, please remove it before release.
Post edited March 20, 2018 by morrowslant
Posted March 20, 2018
I kind of get it. Star Control was already Stardocks substitute IP buyout after having been outbid for Master of Orion by Wargaming. And now they cant even have this because Atari (?) having been dicks by not telling them that it includes nothing but the name Star Control itself. That stings. Then add major planet sized ego issues to the pot and instead using the now future massive amount of lawyer money and time involved into changing a few things to make their SC a bit more distinctive it gets squandered on courtroom drama.

The irony is that Stardock can make good games on its own. Greedy DLC madness aside Galactic Civilizations 3 is a better 4x than MoO3 is and IMO even 4. I was surprised how bland and fast paced MoO2 felt on a replay after about a decade not playing and previously having been deep into GC2 ultimate.

Stardock could easily make a good game which is kind-of like Star Control. Sadly their ego is too big to see their capability behind it or to admit that they had been to greedy by already selling a game which they are potentially not allowed to make the way they sold it.
Posted March 20, 2018
I had hoped they could work things out, but unfortunately it looks like that won't be the case. Somebody will end up losing badly, while the "winning" party will also be severely affected. I guess, at this point things just need to play out.
Posted March 20, 2018
low rated
And look! You forum morons are at it again with the downvoting. I hope everyone of you suffers for being the complete and utter jerks you all are. YOU people are why this forum has gone to shit and you people are too stupid to realize it. People like you will get exactly what you deserve in time. Losers all of you.

My posts in this thread are trying to be informative. Tell you how it is and how things really do work, but keep sitting back in your ignorance and pretending you can change things you can't.

This all still comes down to who owns what...

I get the impression that Fred and Paul aren't clear about it either. They claimed they "owned the IP" yet it's clear from their own E-mail exchanges with GoG that they at least shared that with Atari. Stardock claims they bought worldwide distribution rights in the Atari sale. Fred and Paul claim that "all rights reverted to them" through some unexplained mechanism. This is the real issue in contention and let's face it, Stardock did pay good money for the Trademark for Star Control while Fred and Paul were unable to come up with the money themselves. For all the talking from Fred and Paul, they sure seem to be avoiding exactly how these rights "reverted" to them.

It seems clear the truth is that Stardock owns the Trademark since Fred and Paul have acknowledged that Atari did too in the exchange with GoG. The real problem for Fred and Paul is the way they advertised their game as a "direct sequel" to the Star Control games. This clearly "tarnishes" and infringes on the trademark and to do so within months of the announcement by Stardock of their upcoming game, seems to me they are the ones who have much to lose. It looks bad for them. Furthermore, by arguing the case through their blog, they aren't doing themselves any favors as by promoting public sentiment against Stardock (the Trademark holders) which all that will accomplish is to increase the damage judgement against them.

Let's put it this way...
What would happen if George Lucas were to now create a "direct sequel" to Episode VI after selling the rights to Star Wars to Disney? Think about it...

Then tell me how Fred and Paul trying to do the same thing for Star Control is any different? I really don't see how they win this. And that is why they are desperately grasping at straws trying to claim disuse or abandonment (which rarely works by the way).
Posted March 20, 2018
avatar
RWarehall: And look! You forum morons are at it again with the downvoting. I hope everyone of you suffers for being the complete and utter jerks you all are. YOU people are why this forum has gone to shit and you people are too stupid to realize it. People like you will get exactly what you deserve in time. Losers all of you.

My posts in this thread are trying to be informative. Tell you how it is and how things really do work, but keep sitting back in your ignorance and pretending you can change things you can't.
People have a right to their opinion. If that opinion conflicts with yours, you can either argue about it, or say nothing. Resorting to insult everyone participating in this thread tells me that either you believe your opinion is the one and only truth on this matter, or you have a vested interest on things going the Stardock way.

Not to mention: this is an argument about a name. That only should be of interest to companies, and even then, they believe a name possess a certain magic quality that would make us buy their game in droves, while in reality a game stands on its own merits, not the merits of the games that shared the same name.
Posted March 20, 2018
low rated
avatar
RWarehall: And look! You forum morons are at it again with the downvoting. I hope everyone of you suffers for being the complete and utter jerks you all are. YOU people are why this forum has gone to shit and you people are too stupid to realize it. People like you will get exactly what you deserve in time. Losers all of you.

My posts in this thread are trying to be informative. Tell you how it is and how things really do work, but keep sitting back in your ignorance and pretending you can change things you can't.
avatar
Lashiec: People have a right to their opinion. If that opinion conflicts with yours, you can either argue about it, or say nothing. Resorting to insult everyone participating in this thread tells me that either you believe your opinion is the one and only truth on this matter, or you have a vested interest on things going the Stardock way.

Not to mention: this is an argument about a name. That only should be of interest to companies, and even then, they believe a name possess a certain magic quality that would make us buy their game in droves, while in reality a game stands on its own merits, not the merits of the games that shared the same name.
And where have I insulted everyone in this thread? Why don't YOU get your facts straight. But I did insult every LOSER who thinks downvoting me is a good idea. Maybe YOU ought to get YOUR facts straight.

And this isn't just about a name. This is about trademark and copyright law.
Posted March 20, 2018
avatar
Lashiec: Not to mention: this is an argument about a name. That only should be of interest to companies,
Well, FWIW, if naming constraints end up meaning the next TfB game is called Space Shootin': One Of These Ships Looks Like a Penis I probably would miss out, so to a degree I'm interested in how it shakes out.
Posted March 20, 2018
avatar
RWarehall: And look! You forum morons are at it again with the downvoting. I hope everyone of you suffers for being the complete and utter jerks you all are. YOU people are why this forum has gone to shit and you people are too stupid to realize it. People like you will get exactly what you deserve in time. Losers all of you.

My posts in this thread are trying to be informative. Tell you how it is and how things really do work, but keep sitting back in your ignorance and pretending you can change things you can't.

This all still comes down to who owns what...

I get the impression that Fred and Paul aren't clear about it either. They claimed they "owned the IP" yet it's clear from their own E-mail exchanges with GoG that they at least shared that with Atari. Stardock claims they bought worldwide distribution rights in the Atari sale. Fred and Paul claim that "all rights reverted to them" through some unexplained mechanism. This is the real issue in contention and let's face it, Stardock did pay good money for the Trademark for Star Control while Fred and Paul were unable to come up with the money themselves. For all the talking from Fred and Paul, they sure seem to be avoiding exactly how these rights "reverted" to them.

It seems clear the truth is that Stardock owns the Trademark since Fred and Paul have acknowledged that Atari did too in the exchange with GoG. The real problem for Fred and Paul is the way they advertised their game as a "direct sequel" to the Star Control games. This clearly "tarnishes" and infringes on the trademark and to do so within months of the announcement by Stardock of their upcoming game, seems to me they are the ones who have much to lose. It looks bad for them. Furthermore, by arguing the case through their blog, they aren't doing themselves any favors as by promoting public sentiment against Stardock (the Trademark holders) which all that will accomplish is to increase the damage judgement against them.

Let's put it this way...
What would happen if George Lucas were to now create a "direct sequel" to Episode VI after selling the rights to Star Wars to Disney? Think about it...

Then tell me how Fred and Paul trying to do the same thing for Star Control is any different? I really don't see how they win this. And that is why they are desperately grasping at straws trying to claim disuse or abandonment (which rarely works by the way).
TfB aren't making the sequel. Stardock is. And they were using the Star Control name (OK), but they were packaging SC1 and 2 with it as well as using proprietary items from those games. TfB believes all rights to SC 1 and 2 as well as all the internal content belongs to them. Stardock wants TfB to abandon their claim as they believe they own the rights to the game, and are telling TfB that they didn't create those games. According to the TfB information.
Posted March 20, 2018
avatar
paladin181: TfB aren't making the sequel. Stardock is. And they were using the Star Control name (OK), but they were packaging SC1 and 2 with it as well as using proprietary items from those games. TfB believes all rights to SC 1 and 2 as well as all the internal content belongs to them. Stardock wants TfB to abandon their claim as they believe they own the rights to the game, and are telling TfB that they didn't create those games. According to the TfB information.
No, Fred and Paul did announce their own "sequel" very shortly after Stardock announced theirs. That is the whole crux of this dispute. The way they announced it stepped on the toes of the Star Control trademark that Stardock bought from Atari.
Post edited March 20, 2018 by RWarehall
Posted March 20, 2018
avatar
RWarehall: And look! You forum morons are at it again with the downvoting. I hope everyone of you suffers for being the complete and utter jerks you all are. YOU people are why this forum has gone to shit and you people are too stupid to realize it. People like you will get exactly what you deserve in time. Losers all of you.
I imagine you're downvoted because of your personality rather than the subject. You're needlessly abrasive all the time.

avatar
RWarehall: For all the talking from Fred and Paul, they sure seem to be avoiding exactly how these rights "reverted" to them.
I can't recall where exactly, but I definitely read an explanation of the terms that caused them to revert. It was to do with Accolade not making a new Star Control game.

avatar
RWarehall: Then tell me how Fred and Paul trying to do the same thing for Star Control is any different? I really don't see how they win this. And that is why they are desperately grasping at straws trying to claim disuse or abandonment (which rarely works by the way).
You realise there are two cases, right? Stardock's trademark infringement case (which Fred and Paul were temporarily guilty of but Stardock's claims of damage are greatly exaggerated and they make the ridiculous assertion that F&P didn't create the games) and Fred and Paul's copyright infringement case (which Stardock seem to be guilty of). Then there's Stardock's recent and ridiculous settlement 'offer'.
Post edited March 20, 2018 by SirPrimalform
Posted March 20, 2018
deleted
Posted March 20, 2018
avatar
RWarehall: No, Fred and Paul did announce their own "sequel" very shortly after Stardock announced theirs. That is the whole crux of this dispute. The way they announced it stepped on the toes of the Star Control trademark that Stardock bought from Atari.
Ah, I missed that bit. I thought this was all about distribution rights and IP ownership, divided license and all that. Thanks for pointing it out.
Posted March 21, 2018
avatar
paladin181: Ah, I missed that bit. I thought this was all about distribution rights and IP ownership, divided license and all that. Thanks for pointing it out.
It sort of is now, bur that's what happens when lawyers get involved.

To break it done simply...
Stardock bought out Atari's Star Control ownership in a bankruptcy sale.
Stardock announces Star Control Origins is in development.
Within months, Fred and Paul announce they are creating a new Star Control game claiming it's a direct sequel to SC2.

That's where the trouble started as they did this without first securing licensing rights. The timing is rather mysterious as well considering that Star Control seemed to be given a new life with Stardock's acquisition and Origins announcement. Were Fred and Paul trying to capitalize on this?

But as a result, Stardock in protection their trademark were required to send a Cease and Desist letter to them.

That pissed Fred and Paul off and now they are arguing over everything. IP rights, distribution, royalties and every conceivable but unlikely to be successful claim under the sun. Lawyers for both sides doing what lawyers do with Fred and Paul claiming Stardock should lose everything and Stardock doing the same in reverse.

To pull apart anything from one side's legal documents and try to gain public sympathy for it is just foolish. To take either side based on these legal responses is similarly foolish. Fred and Paul are trying to get Stardock's trademark to be null and void based on a rarely successful disuse clause. In return, Stardock is trying to wrest full control over all parts of the IP based on similar extreme legal reasoning. But that's what lawyers are paid to do; take every angle possible and put them before a judge.

Picking it apart as a laymen and calling Stardock bastards or visa versa is just foolish. And the repeated claims of the uninformed in this thread about what is or isn't "ridiculous" are notwithstanding.

I went through this before, but with regards to "creators", who actually "created" the games legally? That is what is being discussed here. Was it Accolade who approved the project, paid for the advertising, subcontracted it out and hired artists and additional help or F&P. Legally it's not as simple as some people want to make it seem...

As to those damages being "ridiculous" to you, is it really? What happens if a judge decides that Stardock clearly owns the trademark and that this whole media campaign created unnecessary negative publicity damaging Stardock's Origins? How much value did Stardock lose as a result and will a judge deem those damage claims as excessive as you think they are?
Post edited March 21, 2018 by RWarehall
Pages:
1
5
10
11
12
13
14
15
19
This is my favourite topic
Community
General discussionStar Control games being removed from GOG(279 posts)(279 posts)
(279 posts)