Send News. Want a reply? Read this. More in the FAQ.   News Forum - All Forums - Mobile - PDA - RSS Headlines  RSS Headlines   Twitter  Twitter
Customize
User Settings
Styles:
LAN Parties
Upcoming one-time events:

Regularly scheduled events

EA/Activision Lawsuit Moves Forward

Bloomberg has details on progress on West v. Activision, the legal action between Activision and Electronic Arts/Jason West/Vince Zampella over EA's hiring of West and Zampella (thanks Computer and Video Games). Word is the $400 million lawsuit is headed to California Superior Court (Los Angeles County):

Electronic Arts Inc. (ERTS), the second- biggest U.S. video-game publisher, lost a court bid to dismiss the $400-million contract-interference claims by its larger rival Activision Blizzard Inc. (ATVI)

California Superior Court Judge Elihu Berle, at a hearing yesterday in Los Angeles, denied Electronic Arts’ request to throw out the claims, saying Activision had provided sufficient evidence that a jury should decide whether Electronic Arts broke the law by talking to two creators of Activision’s “Call of Duty” franchise while they were still under contract.

Berle rejected Electronic Arts’ argument that it was perfectly lawful for the two top executives of Activision’s Infinity Ward studio, Jason West and Vince Zampella, to explore future employment opportunities. It was ’’a whole different scenario’’ if Electronic Arts approached the two executives while there was still more than two years left on their contract, the judge said.

View
26 Replies. 2 pages. Viewing page 1.
< Newer [ 1 2 ] Older >

26. Re: EA/Activision Lawsuit Moves Forward Dec 25, 2011, 00:51 Nucas
 
InBlack wrote on Dec 23, 2011, 04:56:
If you even believe in such distinctions such as good and evil.
the only times i ever see this "i am above such considerations" thing trotted out is when morally bankrupt actions are being defended. seriously. at least it's consistent.
 
Avatar 49584
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
25. Re: EA/Activision Lawsuit Moves Forward Dec 23, 2011, 23:07 Veterator
 
venomhed wrote on Dec 23, 2011, 13:03:
The main problem in all this is money and the profit motive which spurns on competition.

IF the profit motive were severely diminished or removed entirely and cooperation replaced competition, we would all be better off as a species.

I think just having laws enforced against entities more strictly than they are enforced against the people would be a big step. Right now it's reversed, think Bernie Madoff versus any Wall street outfit that participated in the mortgage tampering. The scale of both given the size of the guilty party scales about right. Madoff hit enough people that most people knew someone through a friend of a friend at least. WS Mortgage guys hit everyone, directly or indirectly.

Madoff, while he could have been punished worse was skewered and burned at the stake compared to what the corporations and the people manning then did via the mortgage ordeal. Hell, we paid them for fucking us.

The letter of the law AND the spirit of the law are ignored when it comes to corporations due to how they insinuate themselves into the government on a multitude of levels. And when it comes to people hurting the wrong corporations or people, the letter and spirit of the law are increased tenfold when it comes time for punishment. Think stealing millions from a well connected billionaire versus a guy who steals 10 grand from someone who makes 20 grand a year.

My favorite example of thought experiment would be the Gulf of Mexico oil spill. BP was not following safety regulations, in fact the US safety regulations have become more lax over the years despite the technology to make things more safe. Mostly through the non-enforcement by watchdog groups, because the companies they watchdog were fucking hiring them for massive salaries.

So take what you know of it, how much or little it may be. Then substitute in a small corporation just trying to get into the oil game. Could they have gotten away with lax safety precautions? Would they still be operating in the US after they basically wiped out the livelihood of hundreds of thousands of people? Would the sicknesses associated with exposure to this spill be covered up?

Now substitute that small corporation with an individual. Would that individual be in jail now?


Now, apply that kind of thinking to everything corporations do. If SOLE person did what they do.....would that person be free to continue doing so next year?

Now, you can ask yourself why it's acceptable in nearly all corporate involved incidents. And then realize that their very existence is allowed by the government through corporate charters which can be revoked at any time. Their belongings could be seized, their wealth frozen, and they could be systematically dismantled or sold to fix what they destroyed. Yet an individual is punished like this except for his life being taken, but a corporation with no life to give is not punished in a way that makes a whole lot of sense and was designed to be so. They'll say too big to fail, and I don't consider that an excuse. That's like saying "Too rich to die", and we all know how that ends up.....Steve Jobs for example. BTW: How did Steve get a liver transplant at his age and presumably with cancer...and so fast?

This comment was edited on Dec 24, 2011, 03:47.
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
24. Re: EA/Activision Lawsuit Moves Forward Dec 23, 2011, 17:20 Dev
 
venomhed wrote on Dec 23, 2011, 13:03:
IF the profit motive were severely diminished or removed entirely and cooperation replaced competition, we would all be better off as a species.
I dunno how practical that is, its been tried before and didn't work out too well.
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
23. Re: EA/Activision Lawsuit Moves Forward Dec 23, 2011, 13:03 venomhed
 
The main problem in all this is money and the profit motive which spurns on competition.

IF the profit motive were severely diminished or removed entirely and cooperation replaced competition, we would all be better off as a species.
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
22. Re: EA/Activision Lawsuit Moves Forward Dec 23, 2011, 10:11 Omni
 
Only in America.
As a swede would say it sopa.
See what I did there?
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
21. Re: EA/Activision Lawsuit Moves Forward Dec 23, 2011, 09:13 Dev
 
Veterator wrote on Dec 23, 2011, 04:39:
Bribing watchdog groups, bribing politicians, using those bribe officials to negotiate lucrative deals the government and therefore the people pay for.
You forgot bribing government to pass laws or silence or fine or put people in jail that are doing things the corporations don't like (ranging from free speech to downloading).
InBlack wrote on Dec 23, 2011, 04:56:
In ages past, greed was solely a personal thing. Either a person was greedy or they werent. Today greed has become institutionalized
It hasn't really changed that much, and it wasn't just personal then. IMHO, most of the wars in history were because some form of greed one country or its rulers had about another country. "Hey that gold mine there? I want it, lets go to war, oh and go ahead and rape and pillage any place you hit and keep the spoils of war for your trouble"
Perhaps the FORM of greed has morphed, so that in civilized countries the greed is more in the corporations now, but greed has always been there, and not just individually.
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
20. Re: EA/Activision Lawsuit Moves Forward Dec 23, 2011, 08:23 ASeven
 
InBlack wrote on Dec 23, 2011, 08:09:
Parallax Abstraction wrote on Dec 23, 2011, 08:02:
InBlack wrote on Dec 23, 2011, 07:38:
ASeven you are preaching to the choir man. I cant believe you totally missed my point.

Corporations cant be evil, because they ARENT human.

You are correct. The corporate entity doesn't make evil decisions, the people running it do. The obvious problem is that in our current society, the people who do make the decisions are no longer held accountable because they hide behind "corporate personhood". If a corporation can't share the same responsibilities as people, they shouldn't get to be considered people.

Exactly the point I was trying to make. Thanks for wording it better than I could

Yeap! I knew what your point was, I was just pretty much exposing even more how ridiculous it is the current legislations towards corporations and how much power they hold nowadays to fuck our lives.
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
19. Re: EA/Activision Lawsuit Moves Forward Dec 23, 2011, 08:09 InBlack
 
Parallax Abstraction wrote on Dec 23, 2011, 08:02:
InBlack wrote on Dec 23, 2011, 07:38:
ASeven you are preaching to the choir man. I cant believe you totally missed my point.

Corporations cant be evil, because they ARENT human.

You are correct. The corporate entity doesn't make evil decisions, the people running it do. The obvious problem is that in our current society, the people who do make the decisions are no longer held accountable because they hide behind "corporate personhood". If a corporation can't share the same responsibilities as people, they shouldn't get to be considered people.

Exactly the point I was trying to make. Thanks for wording it better than I could
 
Avatar 46994
 
I have a nifty blue line!
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
18. Re: EA/Activision Lawsuit Moves Forward Dec 23, 2011, 08:02 Parallax Abstraction
 
InBlack wrote on Dec 23, 2011, 07:38:
ASeven you are preaching to the choir man. I cant believe you totally missed my point.

Corporations cant be evil, because they ARENT human.

You are correct. The corporate entity doesn't make evil decisions, the people running it do. The obvious problem is that in our current society, the people who do make the decisions are no longer held accountable because they hide behind "corporate personhood". If a corporation can't share the same responsibilities as people, they shouldn't get to be considered people.
 
Parallax Abstraction
Geek Bravado | YouTube (Watch/Rate/Comment on my shows!)
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
17. Re: EA/Activision Lawsuit Moves Forward Dec 23, 2011, 08:00 ochentay4
 
Veterator wrote on Dec 23, 2011, 04:39:
There used to be a time in the US, and perhaps it still bears out in the corporate charters issued...that corporations had to consider the welfare of the people. IE, highly profitable company who is poisoning the ground water for miles around would be held accountable and lose their corporate charter (basically a license to exist).

Hell corporations used to employ local citizenry and maintain public parks non-employees could visit because their existence depended on it.

NOW corporations are all about profit. There's nothing wrong with profit, but there is definitely something wrong with going about it by any means necessary.....legal or not. Bribing watchdog groups, bribing politicians, using those bribe officials to negotiate lucrative deals the government and therefore the people pay for. That shit is not OK, has not been OK, and should not be OK going forward. If people were unable to receive bribes without going to jail, that corporate charter definition would move back to the interpretation it used to have. The general theme being that the corporation existed as long as it was beneficial to the people and at the sufferance of those same people.

If a company moved into your area, negotiated contracts where they were required to hire so many local employees......provide X tax revenue and basically be a benefit to the community. Then they turned around and made the jobs intolerable or paid unlivable wages, or offshored all their work (this happened in florida)...that corporation could and should lose it's charter for that kind of backhanded bullshit.
Couldlt said better myself. +1 To you.
 
Avatar 33376
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
16. Re: EA/Activision Lawsuit Moves Forward Dec 23, 2011, 07:38 InBlack
 
ASeven you are preaching to the choir man. I cant believe you totally missed my point.

Corporations cant be evil, because they ARENT human.
 
Avatar 46994
 
I have a nifty blue line!
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
15. Re: EA/Activision Lawsuit Moves Forward Dec 23, 2011, 06:18 ASeven
 
InBlack wrote on Dec 23, 2011, 04:56:
The thing about my mantra....it happens to be true. Corporations really arent evil, GREED is evil. If you even believe in such distinctions such as good and evil.

Explain SOPA/PIPA then. Thats the very definition of corporate fascism, taking away fundamental individual rights.

Corporations can be evil and often are. Some are actually pretty decent but the moment they start treading on people's and customer's rights, sorry, your mantra crumbles to pieces.

For me, the line between a "good" and "evil" corporation is when they start fucking with your rights, and more and more of them are doing this.
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
14. Re: EA/Activision Lawsuit Moves Forward Dec 23, 2011, 04:56 InBlack
 
The thing about my mantra....it happens to be true. Corporations really arent evil, GREED is evil. If you even believe in such distinctions such as good and evil.

In ages past, greed was solely a personal thing. Either a person was greedy or they werent. Today greed has become institutionalized, its still not socially acceptable for a human being to be greedy, but for an organization such as a corporation greed is not only acceptable its necessary. This is the underlying problem. I still believe that corporations can be very valuable aditions to any society but they have to be restrained.

Its unacceptable that corporations have the same legal status as real people, its unacceptable that they operate with just one goal, profit.

Systems and laws have to be put into place which will limit the damage that pure pursuit of profit can do to a society.
 
Avatar 46994
 
I have a nifty blue line!
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
13. Re: EA/Activision Lawsuit Moves Forward Dec 23, 2011, 04:44 Veterator
 
And.......from this blurb of text. If someone is under contract and someone else wants to hire them. Wouldn't it make sense for them to approach them to find out when the contract ended, if they could terminate it early, and if the people would even be interested in moving to the other company?

If West and Zampella sabotaged their work, that's one thing. But if they were approached by another company while under contract...as long as nothing under NDA was discussed...how can they complain?

You'd be perpetually stuck in a job if you couldn't look elsewhere before your contract was up.
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
12. Re: EA/Activision Lawsuit Moves Forward Dec 23, 2011, 04:39 Veterator
 
There used to be a time in the US, and perhaps it still bears out in the corporate charters issued...that corporations had to consider the welfare of the people. IE, highly profitable company who is poisoning the ground water for miles around would be held accountable and lose their corporate charter (basically a license to exist).

Hell corporations used to employ local citizenry and maintain public parks non-employees could visit because their existence depended on it.

NOW corporations are all about profit. There's nothing wrong with profit, but there is definitely something wrong with going about it by any means necessary.....legal or not. Bribing watchdog groups, bribing politicians, using those bribe officials to negotiate lucrative deals the government and therefore the people pay for. That shit is not OK, has not been OK, and should not be OK going forward. If people were unable to receive bribes without going to jail, that corporate charter definition would move back to the interpretation it used to have. The general theme being that the corporation existed as long as it was beneficial to the people and at the sufferance of those same people.

If a company moved into your area, negotiated contracts where they were required to hire so many local employees......provide X tax revenue and basically be a benefit to the community. Then they turned around and made the jobs intolerable or paid unlivable wages, or offshored all their work (this happened in florida)...that corporation could and should lose it's charter for that kind of backhanded bullshit.
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
11. Re: EA/Activision Lawsuit Moves Forward Dec 23, 2011, 04:17 El Pit
 
InBlack wrote on Dec 23, 2011, 03:46:
Corporations ...

...are not people. People sometimes think about doing the RIGHT thing, which might harm profit. A corporation will not. And sometimes the law can be wrong (like allowing corporations to ask their customers to never sue them). That's all just my opinion, though, and not the law. Oh, and not ALL corporations are evil. But some are. Lawful and evil, just like in good old Baldur's Gate.
 
Consoles? I owned two: a Pong clone and an Atari 2600. And that's it.
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
10. Re: EA/Activision Lawsuit Moves Forward Dec 23, 2011, 03:46 InBlack
 
Corporations are not evil. They exist solely to acquire profit for their shareholders. They are allowed to do this by any means allowed by the law. Under law in most developed countries corporations are legaly - people. They have the same rights as any other human. Corporations are not evil. They exist solely to acquire profit for their shareholders. They are allowed to do this by any means allowed by the law. Under law in most developed countries corporations are legaly - people. They have the same rights as any other human. Corporations are not evil. They exist solely to acquire profit for their shareholders. They are allowed to do this by any means allowed by the law. Under law in most developed countries corporations are legaly - people. They have the same rights as any other human. Corporations are not evil. They exist solely to acquire profit for their shareholders. They are allowed to do this by any means allowed by the law. Under law in most developed countries corporations are legaly - people. They have the same rights as any other human.Corporations are not evil. They exist solely to acquire profit for their shareholders. They are allowed to do this by any means allowed by the law. Under law in most developed countries corporations are legaly - people. They have the same rights as any other human. Corporations are not evil. They exist solely to acquire profit for their shareholders. They are allowed to do this by any means allowed by the law. Under law in most developed countries corporations are legaly - people. They have the same rights as any other human.  
Avatar 46994
 
I have a nifty blue line!
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
9. Re: EA/Activision Lawsuit Moves Forward Dec 23, 2011, 01:36 Prez
 
ASeven wrote on Dec 22, 2011, 22:16:
Whoever loses... we win.

Haha. Kinda like the Alien vs Predator movie tagline, only backwards.
 
Avatar 17185
 
Goodbye my Monte boy. May you rest in the peace you never knew in life.
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
8. Re: EA/Activision Lawsuit Moves Forward Dec 23, 2011, 01:21 Yosemite Sam
 
Heh so Activision gets rid of some high cost employees and instead of it hurting thier sales numbers those actually increase... and now they might get thier competition to fork over a dump truck full of cash... Kotick must be laughing his ass off.  
Avatar 21539
 
PSN id PR345, PST - D3, GTA5, Borderlands 2, Grid 2, GTA4, BoS, RDR, GT5, COD WaW, KZ2, RAGE, Dirt2, MC LA, Skate2, LBP, Dead Nation - Wanna jam? Hit me up on PSN, Mention Blues News.

CIV4 MOD http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=326525
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
7. Re: EA/Activision Lawsuit Moves Forward Dec 23, 2011, 01:11 Silicon Avatar
 
EA has a longer history of ruining games than Activision does. I sort of hope they lose.

At the same time a lot of people are employed by EA and I'd hate to see them take such a hit that they had to fire people.
 
Avatar 18037
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
26 Replies. 2 pages. Viewing page 1.
< Newer [ 1 2 ] Older >


footer

.. .. ..

Blue's News logo