Star Citizen Breaking News

[Wipeout]

Anyways, I want to thank the both of you Kyrt and Nomad for putting in your opinions respectfully, even if our opinions do not agree, it is still nice to see and discuss different view points.

[Motto]

and then these 2 lawyers confirmed what I already came to a conclusion for through my own research.

Well, guess what, you are all wrong.

[Wipeout]

Well, guess what, you are all wrong.

Read the article I put in the media thread.  That is the third law professional that puts things on CIGs side.
Looks like it is coming down to Crytek showing communication with CIG that proves the definitions are different than what the golden rule wound state , to swing this for Crytek, but if they don't have it, it found mean things stay in CIGs favor.

This will be interesting to see.  I kind of want Crytek to have that kind of evidence to keep this drama going into the trial, but I would not be surprised if they don't.

[DemonInvestor]

The problem with the exclusive is where it exactly was written.
It's neither 'exclusive license to' nor is it 'exclusivly in StarCitizen', but 'exclusively [use] CryEngine in'. And i guess this will lead to an argument in court if CIG and CryTek won't settle beforehand. So far i still would follow the general idea of exclusive licenses - but we might see what a judge will make of that.

But then again, i see a lot of potential problems.
2.4. - CIG isn't allowed to promote a different Engine - well how'd you read that in connection with their LY switch and what they told people about CryEngine?
2.2.2. + 2.5. + 2.6. - Where's the agreed statement for RSI or those dozen other other english companies that seemingly - judging by Foundry 42 inclusion in the respective third parties list - don't count as affiliates?
1.2. + 1.5. + 1.6. + 8.1. - the game under that definition seems to be already released, and not only logic but also the contract seem to indicate that no termination should occur during the commercial life of said product. So changing the engine in that period ... i don't know.

[Wipeout]

The problem with the exclusive is where it exactly was written.
It's neither 'exclusive license to' nor is it 'exclusivly in StarCitizen', but 'exclusively [use] CryEngine in'. And i guess this will lead to an argument in court if CIG and CryTek won't settle beforehand. So far i still would follow the general idea of exclusive licenses - but we might see what a judge will make of that.

But then again, i see a lot of potential problems.
2.4. - CIG isn't allowed to promote a different Engine - well how'd you read that in connection with their LY switch and what they told people about CryEngine?
2.2.2. + 2.5. + 2.6. - Where's the agreed statement for RSI or those dozen other other english companies that seemingly - judging by Foundry 42 inclusion in the respective third parties list - don't count as affiliates?
1.2. + 1.5. + 1.6. + 8.1. - the game under that definition seems to be already released, and not only logic but also the contract seem to indicate that no termination should occur during the commercial life of said product. So changing the engine in that period ... i don't know.

Only the actual CIG arms that have developers would need to be approved affiliates.  For example RSI itself does not have any developers, therefore dies not need access to the codes.  It would also be dependent on how eAch if thier offices are setup thst will determine if they need approval or not.

[Kyrt]

So we have in the GLA that SQ42 and SC are shown as 2 games.

That are collectively part of one package, that are sold and marketed and promoted as one game.

That was then.

Today S42 is being marketed and sold as a separate standalone game that doesn't require Star Citizen to run.

[Motto]

It is very simple. Crytek gave CIG the rights to use their engine for developing the game Star Citizen. They did that for a fee that was way, way lower than what the fee normally would have been. I don't know why Crytek did that, but Crytek didn't do that because they liked Ortwin and Chris. They gave the low fee in exchange for a couple of things. The prominent promoting of Crytek by CIG was one of those. Another one was the fact that CIG had to use Cryengine and only Cryengine to build the game. And that's the "exclusive" part of the contract. All other "explanations" or "interpretations" and what not are just stupid. They are from people who simply are not willing to see that CIG fucked up their contract with Crytek on so many levels that it is painfully embarrassing that they even tried to defend themselves.

[Kyrt]

2.4. - CIG isn't allowed to promote a different Engine - well how'd you read that in connection with their LY switch and what they told people about CryEngine?

Not allowed to be in the business of...

Its a in compete clause

2.2.2. + 2.5. + 2.6. - Where's the agreed statement for RSI or those dozen other other english companies that seemingly - judging by Foundry 42 inclusion in the respective third parties list - don't count as affiliates?

While there is likely a reason F42 is there, 2.5 seems to cover the rest. Possibly there is dome quirk that prevents F42 meeting the definition of "affiliate"

1.2. + 1.5. + 1.6. + 8.1. - the game under that definition seems to be already released, and not only logic but also the contract seem to indicate that no termination should occur during the commercial life of said product. So changing the engine in that period ... i don't know.

It'd just defining some limits.

But yes....there is effectively no legal way for CIG to terminate this GLA. They could try a deliberate contract breach...but that would still have CryTek making the decision.

[Wipeout]

It is very simple. Crytek gave CIG the rights to use their engine for developing the game Star Citizen. They did that for a fee that was way, way lower than what the fee normally would have been. I don't know why Crytek did that, but Crytek didn't do that because they liked Ortwin and Chris. They gave the low fee in exchange for a couple of things. The prominent promoting of Crytek by CIG was one of those. Another one was the fact that CIG had to use Cryengine and only Cryengine to build the game. And that's the "exclusive" part of the contract. All other "explanations" or "interpretations" and what not are just stupid. They are from people who simply are not willing to see that CIG fucked up their contract with Crytek on so many levels that it is painfully embarrassing that they even tried to defend themselves.

Well 3 law professionals outside of the lawsuit  seem to disagree with you, and yet no law professional outside of the suit to speak up in favor for Crytek.

I wish you were right because it would be great to see this go to court and have CIG lose to further this drama show for entertainment, but it looks like the likelihood of that happening is getting smaller and smaller and things are lokking good for CIG.

[Wipeout]

That are collectively part of one package, that are sold and marketed and promoted as one game.

That was then.

Today S42 is being marketed and sold as a separate standalone game that doesn't require Star Citizen to run.

How do you know it doesn't require Star Citizen client to run?  Currently 2 modules that come with the SQ42 package requires SC client.

[N0mad]

The other aspect of this is to imagine the following scenario: You sign a GLA with Cytek to use CryEngine. Now imagine that Crytek decide to change the licensing for future customers, your original GLA still stands, since it hasn't been terminated, you can't just change your agreement for the same engine on a whim. Now what is the situation if Crytek themselves decided to fork Lumberyard from CryEngine and sell it as a separate engine with a different license agreement? I'm no lawyer, but I'm pretty sure they'd expect you to maintain your original agreement even if Lumberyard was legally a separate engine. I think you can see where I'm going with this argument. Regardless of what is legally permissible, part of a court case is establishing the intentions of the parties involved and I'm fairly certain that CIG wanted to switch engines to avoid making further payments to Crytek (although that assumption may be proven wrong, they may have wanted access to Amazon's web services?).

Just a thought. I know this hasn't been mentioned by Crytek in their arguments but it could come up.

[Kyrt]

How do you know it doesn't require Star Citizen client to run?  Currently 2 modules that come with the SQ42 package requires SC client.

Because it is being marketed and promoted and sold as a game that does not require Star Citizen. 

[Kyrt]

..nd I'm fairly certain that CIG wanted to switch engines to avoid making further payments to Crytek (although that assumption may be proven wrong, they may have wanted access to Amazon's web services?).

The GLA has a royalty buyout and so they wouldn't be saving any money.

Given that, it seems likely the switch to Amazon was made so that they could gain access to AWS and could piggyback off Amazons work wrt networks and servers. Doing it themselves would mean hiring staff with that skillset and they apparently only have...or had...only six network engineers in the entire company.

[Motto]

Chris took a gamble that Crytek wouldn't survive as a company so after they collapsed, he'd have their engine for himself without any further payments or issues whatsoever. Then Crytek survived. And then Chris realised he couldn't build the game he pitched, if he could build the game at all. And keeping it running would cost a fortune. But hey, look, Amazon has taken a license from Crtyek. And they're building on CryEngine too. So moving from our Cryengine to Amazon's Cryengine should be way easier than moving towards another completely different engine. And Amazon doesn't charge for the hosting too. So, that'll solve my problems for now and since we're sticking with Crytek in some way, they probably won't mind. And if they do, well, we're fucked anyway, so I'll burn that bridge the way I always burn all my bridges.

[jwh1701]

 :lol: But after everything that has been uncovered prior to CIG I would not be surprised that there is some truth to your post.

Chris took a gamble that Crytek wouldn't survive as a company so after they collapsed, he'd have their engine for himself without any further payments or issues whatsoever. Then Crytek survived. And then Chris realised he couldn't build the game he pitched, if he could build the game at all. And keeping it running would cost a fortune. But hey, look, Amazon has taken a license from Crtyek. And they're building on CryEngine too. So moving from our Cryengine to Amazon's Cryengine should be way easier than moving towards another completely different engine. And Amazon doesn't charge for the hosting too. So, that'll solve my problems for now and since we're sticking with Crytek in some way, they probably won't mind. And if they do, well, we're fucked anyway, so I'll burn that bridge the way I always burn all my bridges.