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 are right - it has to do with alleged theft of IP. But all software companies have a form that you sign where any of your inventions while employed could be the property of the company.
Its total BS.
Yeah total BS to possibly use a companies resources to make something and not expect them to want a part of it.
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.
whoa now, ive only seen reviews. I was going to buy the elder scrolls online for launch as i do nearly every mmo but when they pulled that bullshit with the collectors edition items i opted out. i havent even played the game. Im just saying they are greedy bastards and the business model they are using proves it.
Zenimax has to prove that while he worked there he developed the exact same thing . He is confident that Occulus does not have a single line of code he developed while at Zenimax. He may have worked on similar technology but if he never came up with it while he was with them if he goes elsewhere and develops it they cannot sue for that. Idea and tech evolve unless you can prove the code is the same they will be hard pressed to be able to win. All this depends on whether the contract he had forbade him from working on similar tech elsewhere.
Usually when you leave a company they have a clause that prevents you from working in a similar area for a time. That is why it is important to see what contract Carmack had with Zenimax. Plus they do not own every idea he has in his head. They only part they have a right too are those he developed while with Zenimax and using their equipment and resources. If he leaves and he is subsequently works on those ideas in his head they cannot sue for the fruit of those ideas.
Also it depends on the clause in his contract that deals with inventions which while he is working for Zenimax would be the ownership of Zenimax. Million dollar question is did he invent it while he was at Zenimax. Obviously not because then they would have patented it. It is quite clear that what he worked on and developed at Zenimax was not anything that was worth patenting otherwise any company with any sense would have patented it. If he develops it after he left he has to give up the rights to the invention in the contract he signed before with Zenimax if there is no such clause then Zenimax cannot claim it.
It all depends on the contract that was written up when the employee whom worked on Oculus Rift was employed. Where I work, if I invent something that has anything to do with the industry I work in, the company I work for owns the rights to the invention. It sux, but when you work for good companies, you're willing to give that up.
They might have a case against Carmack but against the company that owns Occulus no way unless they can prove they knowingly used the tech from Zenimax to develop it and then patented it thus voiding the patent based on theft.
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.
It also depends on how much of his experimentation was done using "company resources", and how much was done on his own time, on his own equipment.
If you're sitting at work, using your desktop to design something unrelated to whatever your company does, they have every right to claim you developed it for them. You were using their equipment and on their clock.
However, there are an awful lot of (evil) companies that seem to think they own your soul. So, if you develop something at home, they think they deserve a piece of it too.
When in doubt, I usually tend towards believing the individual over the corporate mouthpiece. Why? Because a company has no soul or conscience. They care only about the bottom line, and no matter what the circumstances, bringing a law suit is the safe and easy road to take. If they win, they get potential new tech AND a nice chunk of free money. If they lose, at least they are seen as actively trying to enforce their IP, which is important for any future litigation they might want to bring in other cases. And since they already have a legal team, it's not like it costs them anything.
Everyone is having fun bashing them, but they DID say that they have signed paperwork stating the dude would NOT give the tech to a 3rd party (Facebook). That is what this lawsuit is about, and they will most likely win this one.
Once it is patented you have a different burden of proof. Once it is patented you have to give up your rights to the invention. It is not cut and dry and Zenimax has to prove that Carmack was hired to develop the exact thing not just an idea..
Can't say I am aware of all the in and outs. But from what "relatively" little specific information floating around I suspect Zen actually does have a claim. All it would take would be for the individual to spend no more than a few minutes using corporate resources on the tech. Even if they only used a lab for 5 minutes and only eliminated a dead end in maturing the tech, they(Zenimax) would own the intellectual property, or at least some portion of it. The only way Zen wouldn't have a leg to stand on is if the individual ONLY worked at it off company premises, while not using ANY company resources(even a company laptop), while outside normal business hours.
Even without a written employment agreement, your employer may own rights to your patent under a doctrine known as “employed to invent.” It's simple. If you were hired for your inventing or designing skills, or you were hired or directed to create an invention, your employer would own all rights to your subsequent invention. This doctrine is derived from a Supreme court ruling that stated, “Anyone employed to make an invention, who succeeds, during his term of service, in accomplishing that task, is bound to assign to his employer any patent obtained.” In one case involving a process for welding a turbine engine, an employee spent 70% of his employment time on this project and created the invention using the employer’s resources, i.e., the employer’s tools and materials. When completed, the employee acknowledged the employer’s role in the development of the invention. All of these factors, especially, the last one, were important in a court ruling granting rights to the employer under the 'employed-to-invent' doctrine.
Keyword here is succeeds during his term of employment. Question is how much of Occulus can Zenimax prove was developed while he was working for them.
Zenimax hired him to develop VR tech... he left the company to go develop VR tech for another company. He undoubtedly signed a non-compete which was obviously violated.
facebook/oculus' defense will undoubtedly be that they were miles ahead of where zenimax was at the time... Then zenimax will produce a technique or feature that they had that was not in the DK1 but is now in the DK2 (the motion sensing camera or on-board latency tester). Judgement for the plaintiff, but not for the full amount of the suit.
Facebook will settle this for an "undisclosed" amount, probably $10,000,000
Originally posted by kitarad Keyword here is succeeds during his term of employment. Question is how much of Occulus can Zenimax prove was developed while he was working for them.
Since he admitted to using a portion of code owned by Zenimax this can only end one way unless he makes a deal.
Originally posted by Azzras Everyone is having fun bashing them, but they DID say that they have signed paperwork stating the dude would NOT give the tech to a 3rd party (Facebook). That is what this lawsuit is about, and they will most likely win this one.
Signed paperwork, a payoff offer (before the facebook buyout) and Carmack playing the semantics card (acknowledging he worked for Zenimax, worked in their sponsored VR research and stating "They don't own VR" - basically stating 'yes, Zenimax gave me all the tools I needed to develop and understand VR under the impression that it would make them some sort of financial/technological return on their investment, but instead I took everything I learned and went to another company...')
I dunno, to me it seems there is a lot of validity to Zenimax's suit here.
There are 3 types of people in the world. 1.) Those who make things happen 2.) Those who watch things happen 3.) And those who wonder "What the %#*& just happened?!"
Keyword here is succeeds during his term of employment. Question is how much of Occulus can Zenimax prove was developed while he was working for them.
Since he admitted to using a portion of code owned by Zenimax this can only end one way unless he makes a deal.
What I do not get is why did Zenimax allow them to use the code then and not do anything about this before or register a patent before this was sold. It is very fishy I tell you we are not seeing the picture bet these people are all out to shanghai Zuckerberg.
If this is the case, then IBM should get full compensations for Apple and everything they have made thus far.
What a stupid claim. Shallow, self righteous and absolutely absurd. As the main article stated, there is a 2 billion transaction happening and Zenimax is shamefully trying to get their hands on some of that cash.
On this site, this post seems so weird. "Rift does good" - seems like Trion's Rift. Oh, they're cashing in on Trion's Rift? Oh wait, you meant the virtual reality machine in development.
Anyway, moving on. Who's to know who is correct? There's no way. ZOS might be right. But in the end, it won't matter. No one cares.
The people in this thread are going to be swayed by how negative towards ZOS it is due to the OP. Who has no idea about anything, to be honest. No one does but the people involved.
Comments
Yeah total BS to possibly use a companies resources to make something and not expect them to want a part of it.
whoa now, ive only seen reviews. I was going to buy the elder scrolls online for launch as i do nearly every mmo but when they pulled that bullshit with the collectors edition items i opted out. i havent even played the game. Im just saying they are greedy bastards and the business model they are using proves it.
Zenimax has to prove that while he worked there he developed the exact same thing . He is confident that Occulus does not have a single line of code he developed while at Zenimax. He may have worked on similar technology but if he never came up with it while he was with them if he goes elsewhere and develops it they cannot sue for that. Idea and tech evolve unless you can prove the code is the same they will be hard pressed to be able to win. All this depends on whether the contract he had forbade him from working on similar tech elsewhere.
Usually when you leave a company they have a clause that prevents you from working in a similar area for a time. That is why it is important to see what contract Carmack had with Zenimax. Plus they do not own every idea he has in his head. They only part they have a right too are those he developed while with Zenimax and using their equipment and resources. If he leaves and he is subsequently works on those ideas in his head they cannot sue for the fruit of those ideas.
Also it depends on the clause in his contract that deals with inventions which while he is working for Zenimax would be the ownership of Zenimax. Million dollar question is did he invent it while he was at Zenimax. Obviously not because then they would have patented it. It is quite clear that what he worked on and developed at Zenimax was not anything that was worth patenting otherwise any company with any sense would have patented it. If he develops it after he left he has to give up the rights to the invention in the contract he signed before with Zenimax if there is no such clause then Zenimax cannot claim it.
It also depends on how much of his experimentation was done using "company resources", and how much was done on his own time, on his own equipment.
If you're sitting at work, using your desktop to design something unrelated to whatever your company does, they have every right to claim you developed it for them. You were using their equipment and on their clock.
However, there are an awful lot of (evil) companies that seem to think they own your soul. So, if you develop something at home, they think they deserve a piece of it too.
When in doubt, I usually tend towards believing the individual over the corporate mouthpiece. Why? Because a company has no soul or conscience. They care only about the bottom line, and no matter what the circumstances, bringing a law suit is the safe and easy road to take. If they win, they get potential new tech AND a nice chunk of free money. If they lose, at least they are seen as actively trying to enforce their IP, which is important for any future litigation they might want to bring in other cases. And since they already have a legal team, it's not like it costs them anything.
Wow, that's almost an admission that whatever work he did at Zen he took with him.
Can't believe the PR people let him post that.
Once it is patented you have a different burden of proof. Once it is patented you have to give up your rights to the invention. It is not cut and dry and Zenimax has to prove that Carmack was hired to develop the exact thing not just an idea..
It's all about money I bet they will settle this.
Can't say I am aware of all the in and outs. But from what "relatively" little specific information floating around I suspect Zen actually does have a claim. All it would take would be for the individual to spend no more than a few minutes using corporate resources on the tech. Even if they only used a lab for 5 minutes and only eliminated a dead end in maturing the tech, they(Zenimax) would own the intellectual property, or at least some portion of it. The only way Zen wouldn't have a leg to stand on is if the individual ONLY worked at it off company premises, while not using ANY company resources(even a company laptop), while outside normal business hours.
My theme song.
Employed to Invent
Even without a written employment agreement, your employer may own rights to your patent under a doctrine known as “employed to invent.” It's simple. If you were hired for your inventing or designing skills, or you were hired or directed to create an invention, your employer would own all rights to your subsequent invention. This doctrine is derived from a Supreme court ruling that stated, “Anyone employed to make an invention, who succeeds, during his term of service, in accomplishing that task, is bound to assign to his employer any patent obtained.” In one case involving a process for welding a turbine engine, an employee spent 70% of his employment time on this project and created the invention using the employer’s resources, i.e., the employer’s tools and materials. When completed, the employee acknowledged the employer’s role in the development of the invention. All of these factors, especially, the last one, were important in a court ruling granting rights to the employer under the 'employed-to-invent' doctrine.
Keyword here is succeeds during his term of employment. Question is how much of Occulus can Zenimax prove was developed while he was working for them.
Zenimax hired him to develop VR tech... he left the company to go develop VR tech for another company. He undoubtedly signed a non-compete which was obviously violated.
You don't believe in intellectual property?
Maybe I should go create a website called MMORPG?
Maybe I should make a game called World of Warcraft?
Those are IPs after all.
"um" just because he claims he didn't use lines of code while under contract under Zenimax doesnt' mean he is telling the truth.
Unless you are best buddies with thim and you know different?
What actual proof is there? Just becuase you are a fan of something or someone doesn't mean they walk on water.
I think we can let the lawyers battle this one out.
Godfred's Tomb Trailer: https://youtu.be/-nsXGddj_4w
Original Skyrim: https://www.nexusmods.com/skyrim/mods/109547
Serph toze kindly has started a walk-through. https://youtu.be/UIelCK-lldo
facebook/oculus' defense will undoubtedly be that they were miles ahead of where zenimax was at the time... Then zenimax will produce a technique or feature that they had that was not in the DK1 but is now in the DK2 (the motion sensing camera or on-board latency tester). Judgement for the plaintiff, but not for the full amount of the suit.
Facebook will settle this for an "undisclosed" amount, probably $10,000,000
Since he admitted to using a portion of code owned by Zenimax this can only end one way unless he makes a deal.
As long as you are using your own labor and material possessions and code go for it. If I'm on the jury I'll nullify.
My theme song.
Signed paperwork, a payoff offer (before the facebook buyout) and Carmack playing the semantics card (acknowledging he worked for Zenimax, worked in their sponsored VR research and stating "They don't own VR" - basically stating 'yes, Zenimax gave me all the tools I needed to develop and understand VR under the impression that it would make them some sort of financial/technological return on their investment, but instead I took everything I learned and went to another company...')
I dunno, to me it seems there is a lot of validity to Zenimax's suit here.
There are 3 types of people in the world.
1.) Those who make things happen
2.) Those who watch things happen
3.) And those who wonder "What the %#*& just happened?!"
What I do not get is why did Zenimax allow them to use the code then and not do anything about this before or register a patent before this was sold. It is very fishy I tell you we are not seeing the picture bet these people are all out to shanghai Zuckerberg.
Now if he did use code owned by Zenimax it's not just patent trolling and he is a thief.
My theme song.
If this is the case, then IBM should get full compensations for Apple and everything they have made thus far.
What a stupid claim. Shallow, self righteous and absolutely absurd. As the main article stated, there is a 2 billion transaction happening and Zenimax is shamefully trying to get their hands on some of that cash.
On this site, this post seems so weird. "Rift does good" - seems like Trion's Rift. Oh, they're cashing in on Trion's Rift? Oh wait, you meant the virtual reality machine in development.
Anyway, moving on. Who's to know who is correct? There's no way. ZOS might be right. But in the end, it won't matter. No one cares.
The people in this thread are going to be swayed by how negative towards ZOS it is due to the OP. Who has no idea about anything, to be honest. No one does but the people involved.
!!
Will do. thanks.
My theme song.