Crytek Filing Lawsuit Against CIG

Erillion

@rodarin >>>didnt they already settle one lawsuit?>>>>

Enlighten us.

And facts please, not your speculations. Which court ? Which case number ? Plaintiff ? Defendant ?


Have fun

Tiamat64

MaxBacon said:

rodarin said:

Like I said i just pray no one settles the money trail gets exposed and we see just how far these guys (CiG) have gone in scamming people.

The real world does not play by your realities blinded by bias and theory crafting stating what the reality is. And thankfully, bias has no place in justice, unlike this forum and this discussion.

I agree.  It's great that your bias and that of the other Star Citizen fans has no bearing on this case.  Thank goodness!

MaxBacon

Tiamat64 said:

I agree.  It's great that your bias and that of the other Star Citizen fans has no bearing on this case.  Thank goodness!

Same goes to yours.

kikoodutroa8

Erillion said:

kikoodutroa8 said:

Erillion said:

kikoodutroa8 said:

Erillion said:

kikoodutroa8 said:

Erillion said:

Vrika said:

If RSI agreed to give those updates to Crytek, then it was RSI's responsibility to give them. Changing your actions so that you become unable to fulfill your contractual obligations is breaking the contract.

Maybe CIG DID give updates to Crytek, but not in a way that Crytek liked.

"....On November 16, 2015, Crytek requested long overdue bug fixes and optimizations from Defendants. Defendants did not make a good faith effort to  provide Crytek with the promised bug fixes and optimizations to the CryEngine as a complete compilable version. ..."

I am neither a lawyer nor is English my mother tongue, but i do not read "Defendants did NOT provide the promised bug fixes....". I read "did not make a good faith effort..."

"In law, the phrase “good faith” refers to a requirement to act honestly and to keep one’s promises without taking unfair advantage of others or holding others to an impossible standard. "
http://www.rotlaw.com/legal-library/what-is-good-faith/

As others have already said upthread, we are lacking a lot of information (contractual details, CIG's response at court, conditional clauses, international law that may apply and is different from US federal law, additional agreements that may apply etc.) and the case is most likely not as clear cut as the plaintiff presents it.


Have fun

You need to read the whole sentence.

I did. The whole sentence, paragraph, article, Definition and the whole court document. And watched a half dozen analysis videos w.r.t. this topic. 

I THINK you want to make a point here. But forgot to mention the point. 


Have fun

Sorry. My point is that the sentence you quoted as a very clear meaning and it seems you missed it.

Then please explain that "very clear meaning" from your perspective.


Have fun

CIG breached the contract.

Maybe. We will know when we hear the other side. If we ever will.


Have fun

Not maybe, it's sure they did, the CIG guys claim so themselves in many of their promotionnal videos.

Tiamat64

Yea, unless that original contract has some big holes in it, sifting through the internet for Skadden and Crytek must be like being a kid in a candy store where everything is priced at "FREE!"

Hooray for open development!

Raxeon

if they dont have anything from that engine in the current game that not even on the market yet how can the sue them

Tiamat64

Raxeon said:

if they dont have anything from that engine in the current game that not even on the market yet how can the sue them

https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/market

— on the market

: available for purchase; also : up for sale 

Orinori

Tiamat64 said:

Yep.  Don't worry Star Citizen fans. Skadden, one of the top five law firms you don't want to find on the opposite end of the litigation table from you, wouldn't actually care about their reputation or win record and is just in it for the money and doesn't actually care whether or not they lose the case or whether or not the case has any merit, so they'd certainly take a case where their side only consists of much exaggeration and bluster they could muster with not much to it!

Keep telling yourself that, Star Citizen fan.  Keep the faith strong! Just don't contribute more than $35.00.  Orinori said he didn't, so he doesn't have much to lose (not that it matters, because this case is in CiG's bag!)

You missed my point, I was saying even if they win it is unlikely a big deal. Why on earth would it be. This is just business as usual, contracts are made and broken all the time.

SpottyGekko

rodarin said:

...

Even if you didnt like these guys before they are now a cliche villain in some bad TV show. So now you HAVE to hate them.
...

Huh ?

Did the judge pronounce a verdict then ?

I thought in the US you were "innocent until proven guilty". Allegations don't constitute proof of anything, the court will decide on that.

So put away that hangin' rope, and let the justice system do what it's designed to do...

Tiamat64

Orinori said:

You missed my point, I was saying even if they win it is unlikely a big deal. Why on earth would it be.

Well, what type of win are we talking about here?  Crytek has brought forth multiple charges, of which they may win some and might not win others.  And even in cases where Crytek then wins, then the outcome might be different depending on some other factors.

If Crytek hypothetically wins the injunction that Star Citizen must cease development, Star Citizen is pretty much finished.  Literally.  But that's probably the worse case scenario and I don't think I've seen even a single Star Citizen hater (Derek Smart included) believe it'll go THAT far.

If they hypothetically prove that CiG had no right to make SQ42 under the license, CiG must stop producing SQ42 and remove all production from it, pay punitive charges, but most importantly, guess what CiG pledged as collateral on the public records to that big Coutts banking loan (which on the public record still has its status as Outstanding to this day).  By the way, misrepresenting collateral to a bank is a criminal offense.  (I'm an accountant and I've seen first hand what that can do when I came across a case like htat and... yea, that got ugly).  It'll partially depend on that point if Discovery from the courts (sifting through CiG's internal communications) proves that CiG lied to the bank on purpose or was seriously just that (innocently) stupid.

If Crytek hypothetically "wins" by at least getting this thing to court in the first place, CiG will go under Discovery and will have to disclose its inside communications and financials.  At least then we'll get to find out if a lot of the rumours of mismanaged spending and paid shills are true.  This is one of those "wins" where the final outcome depends on exactly what CiG was doing behind closed doors.  If CiG is innocent behind closed doors beyond just the contract breach, then at worse they're just going to have to deal with the damages from the trial (which at that point will be in the tens of millions because trials aren't cheap).  However, if discovery actually discovers other shenangans not directly involved with the trial, those will light up their own trials.  For example, if Discovery leads to discovering things like the Imperial News Network fiasco where there's a lot of evidence that the founder was being given gifts and money from CiG but previously there no hard proof.  If THAT is true, criminal charges can follow for both CiG and the shills involved because laws are broken if a shill doesn't disclose their patron (shilling by itself IS legal by the way, but covering up that you're a shill isn't in some circumstances like the ones that INN was accused of)

Of course, Discovery will also result in making CiG's financials public.  If they have nothing to hide, then again, it just stops there and CiG might be okay (not including the millions in damages and legal fees they'd be paying of course).  But if they do have something to hide however.... it could be as something as just "kinda" bad like Chris Roberts spending too friggin' much on plane tickets and executive salaries and now the backers know, or it could lead to even worse shenanigans like whether or not CiG actually qualifies for that huge British tax break they're getting (and need to repay that loan).  That tax break is estimated to be in the millions by the way because it's 25% of development costs with no limit.  Lots of arm-chair analytics pointed out that, from an outsider perspective, it doesn't look like CiG met those requirements.  If Discovery goes through and ACTUAL NOT arm-chair lawyers and accountants discover that's the case.... well, again, that's a criminal offense.

If Crytek at the very least "wins" a settlement, then it's going to be a pretty big amount.  They're going to want to recover legal costs for Skadden at the very least, and Skadden is known to spend several months researching for cases in advance before bringing the complaint, meaning that Crytek's legal fees are possibly already around a few million even before this complaint was ever made available to the public.  Assuming by "win" we mean "have the upper hand", it's not going to be a small settlement.  Crytek wouldn't risk the high legal fees for peanuts.  So they're going to ask for a huge settlement on top of the huge legal fees they already paid to that point.

At that point, CiG's status depends on how much money they have.  But as pointed out by many people, me included, Crytek has been in contact with CiG over this for almost two years, which gives the impression that CiG wasn't willing to pay whatever Crytek was asking for (either that or CiG are just so ridiculously arrogant and MORONIC that they thought it was a good idea to let Crytek get to the point where Crytek made this public complaint, which I really can't rule out.  ...at all)


These all of course are just possibilities.  Truthfully though almost any outcome that could result from "The case goes to court" is disastrous for CiG, so they'd better hope they can reach a settlement with Crytek before then.  Of course, again, evidence suggests that the time for settlement has possibly already past.

...19 days before CiG's deadline to give a legal response to the complaint is here.  HYPE.

Arglebargle

MaxBacon said:

rodarin said:

Like I said i just pray no one settles the money trail gets exposed and we see just how far these guys (CiG) have gone in scamming people.

The real world does not play by your realities blinded by bias and theory crafting stating what the reality is. And thankfully, bias has no place in justice, unlike this forum and this discussion.

That pretty much tells me you've never worked in a legal field.....

MaxBacon

Arglebargle said:

That pretty much tells me you've never worked in a legal field.....

Justice 101: "innocent until proven guilty".

Justice 101 when it involves SC: "guilty until proven innocent".

The usual.

Arglebargle

MaxBacon said:

Arglebargle said:

That pretty much tells me you've never worked in a legal field.....

Justice 101: "innocent until proven guilty".

Justice 101 when it involves SC: "guilty until proven innocent".

The usual.

Like I said, no experience....  Quoting 'perfect world' aphorisms and cliches doesn't cut it.

I wish it did work that way.

Given previous poor and disorganized CIG management, any of these errors are possible.  Will be interesting to see how butch a law firm CIG hires to represent them.   If it is Ortwin, he has a fool for a client.  Oh, wait.....

Orinori

Tiamat64 said:

Orinori said:

You missed my point, I was saying even if they win it is unlikely a big deal. Why on earth would it be.

lots of stuff, to much xmas drink to address everything

You seem to assume that bringing financials out into the open is bad for CIG. With amount of employees they have I find it hard to believe there is anything at all out of the ordinary. They seem to operate close to maximum funds collected total and projected while allowing a small window for change that they can comfortably soak up.

Crytek as I said will overstate their case and CIG will do same for defense. I expect something totally boring as an outcome and my bet is still on no one knowing anything, or perhaps that is more a wish because I know it will drive so many people completely nuts!

Tiamat64

Orinori said:

Tiamat64 said:

Orinori said:

You missed my point, I was saying even if they win it is unlikely a big deal. Why on earth would it be.

lots of stuff, to much xmas drink to address everything

You seem to assume that bringing financials out into the open is bad for CIG. With amount of employees they have I find it hard to believe there is anything at all out of the ordinary. They seem to operate close to maximum funds collected total and projected while allowing a small window for change that they can comfortably soak up.

Crytek as I said will overstate their case and CIG will do same for defense. I expect something totally boring as an outcome and my bet is still on no one knowing anything, or perhaps that is more a wish because I know it will drive so many people completely nuts!

Keep on wishing.  Like I keep saying, you gotta believe. Star Citizen is built entirely on wishes after all.

MaxBacon

Arglebargle said:

Like I said, no experience....  Quoting 'perfect world' aphorisms and cliches doesn't cut it.
I wish it did work that way.

Weird, sensationalist cliches is how I would put your claims, always making the statements not out of insight of the present but out of the assumption of reality, technically unproven but proven by confirmation bias.

And that is what I mean in the face of justice there is no bias, I mean this sort of forum drama people usually attach themselves to one side of a story and paint it as "the whole story", but that is obviously not the stand of who will rule a case.

Arglebargle

MaxBacon said:

Arglebargle said:

Like I said, no experience....  Quoting 'perfect world' aphorisms and cliches doesn't cut it.
I wish it did work that way.

Weird, sensationalist cliches is how I would put you on your claims, always making the statements not out of insight of the present but out of the assumption of reality, technically unproven but proven by confirmation bias.

And that is what I mean in the face of justice there is no bias, I mean this sort of useless forum drama people usually attach themselves to one side of a story and paint it as "the whole story", but that is obviously not the stand of who will rule a case.

Enjoy the Perry Mason reruns....

mr1602

Arglebargle said:

Like I said, no experience....  Quoting 'perfect world' aphorisms and cliches doesn't cut it.

I wish it did work that way.

Given previous poor and disorganized CIG management, any of these errors are possible.  Will be interesting to see how butch a law firm CIG hires to represent them.   If it is Ortwin, he has a fool for a client.  Oh, wait.....

I seriously doubt it'll be Ortwin as even CIG can't be that dumb.
Then again... This is CIG where the motto is 'There is always more and it is always worse'.
We'll know soon enough as CIG has 20 days to respond so that's 5th of Jan I think?

mr1602

One thing that caught my eye is that if this goes to discovery; streamers, influencers who received payment from CIG but didn't declare them would run afoul from FTC. Considering Youtube / Twitch are based in US, their ability to produce video content on those platforms would become a problem and thus I doubt their careers as a 'full time streamer' would continue.

I can see this area becoming a very dark place as I told one streamer; 'GET A LAWYER ASAP!'.

FrodoFragins

Nothing good will come of this obviously unless CIG wins a slam dunk and gets all legal fees covered.  They may even be pouring over their code to purge anything they used that belongs to crytek and not lumberyard.  Not a cheap process.

FrodoFragins

mr1602 said:

One thing that caught my eye is that if this goes to discovery; streamers, influencers who received payment from CIG but didn't declare them would run afoul from FTC.

yeah well that's their own fault LOL.

rodarin

FrodoFragins said:

Nothing good will come of this obviously unless CIG wins a slam dunk and gets all legal fees covered.  They may even be pouring over their code to purge anything they used that belongs to crytek and not lumberyard.  Not a cheap process.

the best thing that can happen from this for people l that actually want the game that is is Roberts and everyone in his orbit get taken off the project. Then it MIGHT have a tiny chance of releasing someday.

Its completely unreal that people have (allegedly) shipped this guy 173 million bucks, a guy who has never ever released a game himself, and anything he worked on that was eventually released he wasnt even around.

Now it could be a catch 22 and that WITHOUT him the (alleged) money dries up. But if I actually wanted to play this thing I would want him gone.

Kefo

rodarin said:

FrodoFragins said:

Nothing good will come of this obviously unless CIG wins a slam dunk and gets all legal fees covered.  They may even be pouring over their code to purge anything they used that belongs to crytek and not lumberyard.  Not a cheap process.

the best thing that can happen from this for people l that actually want the game that is is Roberts and everyone in his orbit get taken off the project. Then it MIGHT have a tiny chance of releasing someday.

Its completely unreal that people have (allegedly) shipped this guy 173 million bucks, a guy who has never ever released a game himself, and anything he worked on that was eventually released he wasnt even around.

Now it could be a catch 22 and that WITHOUT him the (alleged) money dries up. But if I actually wanted to play this thing I would want him gone.

It's possible the whales would continue to fund the project if Roberts and co were kicked out of the company but I could see someone not touching it with a 50 foot pole and just letting the project burn to the ground 

kikoodutroa8

Lol are you guys talking about Star Citizen 2? I'm so hyped!

Erillion

I took a deeper look into the information that CryTek gets 500 million from the Turkish government.

All relevant articles are between 26.-28. Dec 2016. Half of them claim that CryTek is investing money in Turkey, which is strange because the same articles talk about CryTek closing down 5 studios and not paying their employees. The other half claim that CryTek receives money from Turkey .... but only if they move from Frankfurt to Turkey  and invest all that money in Turkey itself.

Now ... the information is based on a video from a speech of a politician. As far as i can tell the only thing the politician says is that three Turkish brothers from Germany invest heavily in Turkey, especially in the gaming sector. He does not mention them by name, but there is a strong indication that he meant the three CryTek founders.

I find no reference at all that CryTek has actually received ANY money from Turkey. But they DID close down their studios in Budapest, Seoul and Shanghai in 2016 due to financial troubles. They sold their studio in Sofia to Sega in 2017. The CryTek studios in Nottingham and Austin are closed since 2014.  Now only CryTek Kiev and Istanbul remain.

The status of their games is not very clear  ... "Arena of Fate" was developed in Sofia, a studio which was just sold. Two VR projects for PlayStation are being worked on, but the sales numbers of VR titles are modest. One free-to-play project called "Hunt:Showdown" was reannounced in May 2017 (before that it was developed in Austin until the studio there was shut down in 2014).

It is my personal opinion that CryTek certainly would welcome any additional cash they can get - anyway they can get it.


Have fun