Star Citizen Breaking News

[Backer42]

Hey Sandi, CryTek isn't after a settlement. Their goal is prevent you and your husband from appearing at Gamescom 2018 to shit on CryEngine again like every year. If that means they have to put all your 42 shell firms out of their misery, I'm sure, Skadden is happy to do exactly that. Think something like a "wipe-out".

[Motto]

Play nice guys   :cop:

[dsmart]

We will simply have to agree to disagree on this, for me there is to much against crytek at this time, and if Crytek doesn't have proper evidence then I won't be surprised that this case will only be about specific bugsmashers videos and not giving updates to Crytek.  After the research I have done, I can't deny what 3 law professionals have stated which gives more credit to the conclusion I came to.  That conclusion being CIG did not breach the GLA in the stuff that they responded too, and that the contract and exhibit 2 do support what they did with the package split.  You say I am wrong, but honestly what you are saying looks wrong to me based on what the GLA says .

We will have to wait and see .  Hopefully Crytek response is going to include evidence to support thier side.

 :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:

[StanTheMan]

We will simply have to agree to disagree on this, for me there is to much against crytek at this time, and if Crytek doesn't have proper evidence then I won't be surprised that this case will only be about specific bugsmashers videos and not giving updates to Crytek.  After the research I have done, I can't deny what 3 law professionals have stated which gives more credit to the conclusion I came to.  That conclusion being CIG did not breach the GLA in the stuff that they responded too, and that the contract and exhibit 2 do support what they did with the package split.  You say I am wrong, but honestly what you are saying looks wrong to me based on what the GLA says .

We will have to wait and see .  Hopefully Crytek response is going to include evidence to support thier side.

What makes you think that you know better than Skadden ?

[Wipeout]

What makes you think that you know better than Skadden ?

What makes you think Skadden is right, an all the other law professionals who spoke out, including council for CIG, are wrong?
You believe Skadden has a perfect record?  That they only take cases that are sure winners?

[Kyrt]

What makes you think Skadden is right, an all the other law professionals who spoke out, including council for CIG, are wrong?
You believe Skadden has a perfect record?  That they only take cases that are sure winners?

Certainly not.
 
IMO anyway, CIG could very likely win this case depending on how certain aspects of law are interpreted. I don't believe the case will be dismissed, but again, it wouldn't be surprising.

The issue about Skadden is that they are a highly reputable firm with a reputation that allows them to charge $1000 an hour. They aren't likely to willingly do anything to damage that reputation....and frivolously pursuing this case, if it really were the slam dunk CIGs response suggests, would damage it.

Maybe not a lot, but it often doesn't take a lot.

This, in turn, supports the implication that CryTek possess evidence which supports their interpretation of the GLA. The most obvious would be emails.

We must also be mindful that we don't really know for sure what CryTek really want from ths. My own opinion is that they want a simple payout, the code they are owed and their code removed from Star Citizen (ie, their IP protected).

Modest aims...but one could also suggest they are after another end. Perhaps all they want...for whatever reason...is the contract to be terminated. Its easy to see why CIG would not want this...they'd have to delete CryEngine code, and that might be problematic.

Regardless, Skaddens presence is not a guarantee  of victory, but it does imply a stronger case on CryTeks part. I do not believe the case will be dismissed, even without a response; I think it strong enough to survive that challenge mostly intact but I think CryTek will need more than what they have shown to demonstrate intent.

In short...CIG are probably guilty, but proving it to the standard required is going to be difficult.

Which is why I am looking forward to their response. It should give us a better idea of the real strength of CryTeks case.

And...who knows? Maybe it will be dismissed.

[dsmart]

What makes you think Skadden is right, an all the other law professionals who spoke out, including council for CIG, are wrong?
You believe Skadden has a perfect record?  That they only take cases that are sure winners?

I dunno. Maybe because there are good and bad lawyers? And because Skadden, unlike those other guys, have more facts about the case?

[Wipeout]

I dunno. Maybe because there are good and bad lawyers? And because Skadden, unlike those other guys, have more facts about the case?

Well if you want to place your bets on Skadden/Crytek maybe having evidence to show the language of the GLA is different than what it would mean in the common usage, then go ahead.  I hope you are right and they do, but I have my doubts that they do.  I am afraid this is going to be like the Facebook/Bethesda suit where Bethesda/Skadden lost all the major points of the complaint and won the minor complaints, so I can see the same thing happening here where Crytek/Skadden might only win on the parts of not giving updates to Cryek and bugsmashers.

We will see.  What I want to happen and what I think will most likely happen are very much polar opposites. lol.

[StanTheMan]

Well if you want to place your bets on Skadden/Crytek maybe having evidence to show the language of the GLA is different than what it would mean in the common usage, then go ahead.  I hope you are right and they do, but I have my doubts that they do.  I am afraid this is going to be like the Facebook/Bethesda suit where Bethesda/Skadden lost all the major points of the complaint and won the minor complaints, so I can see the same thing happening here where Crytek/Skadden might only win on the parts of not giving updates to Cryek and bugsmashers.

We will see.  What I want to happen and what I think will most likely happen are very much polar opposites. lol.

Best thing to do as a Lay person is let the experts argue it out and apply some critical thinking.

If someone like Skadden brings a case against you ... probably got grounds....probably going to have to pay up..

Croberts is a scamming incompetent...hes been sued by Costner (who is apparently a decent fella) ...probably been ripping off Crytek..

[dsmart]

Well if you want to place your bets on Skadden/Crytek maybe having evidence to show the language of the GLA is different than what it would mean in the common usage, then go ahead.  I hope you are right and they do, but I have my doubts that they do. 

I can't wait to read their response this Friday. I personally believe it's going to be amazing and completely devastating to CIG.

I am afraid this is going to be like the Facebook/Bethesda suit where Bethesda/Skadden lost all the major points of the complaint and won the minor complaints, so I can see the same thing happening here where Crytek/Skadden might only win on the parts of not giving updates to Cryek and bugsmashers.

We will see.  What I want to happen and what I think will most likely happen are very much polar opposites. lol.

You DO know how silly that sounds, right? Different case, different parties, DIFFERENT EVERYTHING. That's like comparing Apples to Eggs.

[Wipeout]

I can't wait to read their response this Friday. I personally believe it's going to be amazing and completely devastating to CIG.

You DO know how silly that sounds, right? Different case, different parties, DIFFERENT EVERYTHING. That's like comparing Apples to Eggs.

I can't wait for the response either, and hope they do have evidence to show stuff means something different than what the common usage is.


The point of the comparison is to show just because Skadden is involved, it doesn't automatically mean everything in a complaint is true and can be proven, it doesn't automatically mean that Skadden is right.

[Bubba]

Of course, I'm skeptical when Derek in his latest tweetroll unloads a chain of ad homines in place of an argument: Skadden vs. internet lawyers, especially when he had more complimentary things to say about said Internet lawyers when they were saying things he liked to hear.
Yes, Skadden does lose cases. The Supreme Court even ruled against them last year.
On a complaint not every cause needs to be equally strong.
But remember something Mr. French said about the initial complaint: it was short,  outlining the causes for action without providing all the gory details. His view was that this was a sign they were looking to settle.
Yes, but there's something more going on. Look again at the cig/rsi "business model": currently they're seeking "pledges"  for future features so they can develop those they've already "sold." This model needs a public that believes they can deliver. While having a few whales and shills enforce a toxic community that aggressively ridicules the competition (cue the ED hating) may seem to be in the interest of CGI/rsi, it's actually lethal. It means their fans have created a closed social system with a rigid hierarchy, effectively isolating themselves from any potential new members. The only citizens they have active now are those that were active in 2015.
They're dying even while they talk about how great things are.
And here comes Skadden on behalf of CryTek, and they cry "shakedown".
Well, the strength of the case is not just that the contract was broken, but also that, to even discuss it,  CGI/rsi will have to admit to their dwindling fanbase that the story they've been telling is not entirely accurate. Even as their thug -driven hype machine tries to spin it, the cognitive dissonance will eat away at their backers.
So this lawsuit in itself has a huge cost to the defendants, one they don't seem to realize as they cheerfully reveal the business details that the plaintiff merely alluded to.
I am looking forward to Skadden's response. Now that CIG/RSI has put into play all these aspects that the initial complaint merely threatened, we can get to the meat.
The game may suck, but the meta is fantastic.

[dsmart]

The point of the comparison is to show just because Skadden is involved, it doesn't automatically mean everything in a complaint is true and can be proven, it doesn't automatically mean that Skadden is right.

I get that, because it's obvious. But nobody is saying they are right. We're all giving opinions on our reading of the GLA. What the law determines is right, is what will prevail. And that's where expertise comes in. An experienced and expensive law firm would not take a take unless it had some merit. And of course that sort of experience comes with the expertise to make a determination as to whether or not their reading and understanding of the GLA is correct or not. That's how the law works.

I can't wait to read what those Youtube lawyers have to say in the coming weeks, seeing as they automatically gave CIG a "win" by declaring a whole heap of nonsense. The only way CIG is likely to win, is if the judge dismisses all of the 4 points in MtD. And that's not bloody likely to happen.

[dsmart]

Of course, I'm skeptical when Derek in his latest tweetroll unloads a chain of ad homines in place of an argument:

Wait! what? Please show me a SINGLE instance of ad hominem in that Tweet unroll

https://threadreaderapp.com/thread/953691070898102272.html

But remember something Mr. French said about the initial complaint: it was short,  outlining the causes for action without providing all the gory details. His view was that this was a sign they were looking to settle.

Yeah, that's rubbish. It's a common strategy to do a barebones filing in order to see how the other side responds. THEN you hit them with the rest of the facts. And that's what I expect to happen in their upcoming (hopefully tomorrow, which is the deadline) filing.

Also, why wouldn't they be looking to settle? The majority of cases never go to trial. So why is that an issue?

And here comes Skadden on behalf of CryTek, and they cry "shakedown".

That fact that they think a company suing to enforce a contract is a shakedown, just completely shows their bias, and lays waste any argument they could possibly have. Of course it's something they see as an attack on their "dream", so this attitude is to be expected.

Well, the strength of the case is not just that the contract was broken, but also that, to even discuss it,  CGI/rsi will have to admit to their dwindling fanbase that the story they've been telling is not entirely accurate. Even as their thug -driven hype machine tries to spin it, the cognitive dissonance will eat away at their backers. So this lawsuit in itself has a huge cost to the defendants, one they don't seem to realize as they cheerfully reveal the business details that the plaintiff merely alluded to.

This is precisely why the CIG response reads like a PR move to appease the backers, as it had zero defense. Heck, they didn't even bother to address 2 of the 4 issues in the complaint, which guarantees that their MtD would fail.

I am looking forward to Skadden's response. Now that CIG/RSI has put into play all these aspects that the initial complaint merely threatened, we can get to the meat.

If I'm right and the upcoming response is a nuclear explosion, it pretty means the end of CIG, even before the judge gets around to her Feb 9th ruling on the MtD.

The game may suck, but the meta is fantastic.

That it is.

[StanTheMan]

Code: [Select]

"A fortiori", it's a "Wipeout"

Now where is French ATM ?

Oh here he is

at 13.09...French walks back from his previous position ?

"is the judge really going to dismiss this case on a motion to dismiss ? Probably not "

We are not talking about very good "legal education" here ....are we Frenchie ?

...and the Shitizens are definitely playing "Sideline" Brokeback not  "Sideline Quarterback" !

Sell me another JPEG Chris !