Descent Royalty Dispute

There's another story brewing about game comings and goings on GOG.com besides the above and the recent report of the imminent departure of Duke Nukem games. A post on reddit notes that though the Interplay catalog is now on sale on GOG.com, the Descent series is not part of this, and is no longer offered on the service (thanks PC Gamer). This forum post from rights-holder Parallax Software explains that this is due to an ongoing royalty dispute with Interplay. Here's word:
Hey, Folks. Here's the story.

Parallax Software still exists and still owns the copyrights to the Descent games. Under our 21-year-old agreement, Interplay has the exclusive rights to sell Descent and Descent II, and they have been doing so on Good Old Games and Steam.

The problem is that Interplay has not paid to Parallax any royalties since 2007. We've talked to them about this numerous times over the years, and finally took action this fall. We served Interplay official notice that they were in breach of the contract, and when they still failed to pay we terminated the agreement.

This means that Interplay has lost the right to sell the Descent games, which is why they came down from GOG. (We're not sure why they're still on Steam; they shouldn't be.)

Interplay does, however, still own the Descent trademark, which they are free to use or license as they see fit (such as for Descent: Underground) as long as they don't violate our copyrights.

As for whether Descent and Descent II will be available for purchase again, we hope so. We'd be very happy to work things out with Interplay.

Matt Toschlog & Mike Kulas
Parallax Software
View : : :
16 Replies. 1 pages. Viewing page 1.
Newer [  1  ] Older
16.
 
Re: Descent Royalty Dispute
Dec 31, 2015, 11:24
16.
Re: Descent Royalty Dispute Dec 31, 2015, 11:24
Dec 31, 2015, 11:24
 
ViRGE wrote on Dec 30, 2015, 17:03:
To be fair, 21 years ago no one was thinking about digital distribution as we have it now. Neither was anyone thinking Interplay would end up being a scumbag deadbeat.

Uhh bullshit copyright law has been long discussed for a long time, it's just that the law is so corrupt and people so stupidly retarded they don't know their rights. Business community has been taking away our rights to own our shit for 200+ years stealing the right of the people to their own culture (game code/assets, etc). Copyright/intellectual property laws were made in rich peoples interest and the public got screwed as usual.

Copyright extension over the last 200 years roughly
15.
 
Re: Descent Royalty Dispute
Dec 31, 2015, 11:15
15.
Re: Descent Royalty Dispute Dec 31, 2015, 11:15
Dec 31, 2015, 11:15
 
verybad1 wrote on Dec 30, 2015, 20:21:
yonder wrote on Dec 30, 2015, 18:39:
verybad1 wrote on Dec 30, 2015, 14:14:
Uhh, Descent had it's day, but is there seriously ANY purpose for having a concern about money from those old games now? I can't imagine playing them now myself, they're just TOO effing old...

Well SOMEONE isn't old enough to have experienced nostalgia...

But yeah... I've hated Interplay stone they became EA before EA did. And this is why.

Believe me I'm more than old enough. I just don't like it enough I guess. *shrugs&* If someone wants to spend money on it, it's their money, 'm not judging them, Didn't like enough when it was new I guess.

Descent wasn't the best game single player wise, it's remembered primarily for multiplayer over kali/kahn and early LAN/modems over the net. Descent 1/2, Warcraft 2, doom 2, duke nukem 3d, etc were played over IPX emulators. Warcraft 2 had to be the biggest thing pushing internet gaming back then outside of doom 2, quake and unreal tournament.

Personally Freespace 2 is the game that definitely holds up from that era, descent 1/2 basically need to be re-imagined single player wise, their stories were not good and the best in the series story wise was descent 2. The atmopshere of D2 was really amazing for the time, the story was barebones but it gave you enough of a world to get immersed in. I always liked the voice actor for the material defender.

Just leaving this awesome clip here, the Freespace 2 open trailer:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xhAR8rWPluQ
14.
 
Re: Descent Royalty Dispute
Dec 30, 2015, 20:21
14.
Re: Descent Royalty Dispute Dec 30, 2015, 20:21
Dec 30, 2015, 20:21
 
yonder wrote on Dec 30, 2015, 18:39:
verybad1 wrote on Dec 30, 2015, 14:14:
Uhh, Descent had it's day, but is there seriously ANY purpose for having a concern about money from those old games now? I can't imagine playing them now myself, they're just TOO effing old...

Well SOMEONE isn't old enough to have experienced nostalgia...

But yeah... I've hated Interplay stone they became EA before EA did. And this is why.

Believe me I'm more than old enough. I just don't like it enough I guess. *shrugs&* If someone wants to spend money on it, it's their money, 'm not judging them, Didn't like enough when it was new I guess.
13.
 
Re: Descent Royalty Dispute
Dec 30, 2015, 18:39
13.
Re: Descent Royalty Dispute Dec 30, 2015, 18:39
Dec 30, 2015, 18:39
 
verybad1 wrote on Dec 30, 2015, 14:14:
Uhh, Descent had it's day, but is there seriously ANY purpose for having a concern about money from those old games now? I can't imagine playing them now myself, they're just TOO effing old...

Well SOMEONE isn't old enough to have experienced nostalgia...

But yeah... I've hated Interplay stone they became EA before EA did. And this is why.
12.
 
Re: Descent Royalty Dispute
Dec 30, 2015, 17:22
12.
Re: Descent Royalty Dispute Dec 30, 2015, 17:22
Dec 30, 2015, 17:22
 
LurkerLito wrote on Dec 30, 2015, 10:03:
I hate these kinds of deals. I don't blame Parallax at all for doing this but seriously, don't sell the trademark name without the dam game. Now this game is basically in limbo and can never be sold again till their dispute is done. Parallax can't sell it because it would be trademark infringement, Interplay can't sell it cause it would be copyright infringement. I am pretty sure it is crap like this that keeps old games like NoLF near impossible to find the "owners".

NOLF is an especially bad case. Night Dive Studios actually tried to get the license so they contacted Fox, WB and Activision. None of the companies had any idea who owned the license but when NDS tried to renew the copyright, WB threatened to sue. Really, really stupid.

Copyright law should require copyright owners to actually do something with said copyright. NOLF isn't being sold and no new NOLF games or products are being produced. There is zero reason for WB to claim the copyright unless they plan on re-releasing the games, which I seriously doubt. Hell, I doubt they even have the source code for the original games.
Avatar 20715
11.
 
Re: Descent Royalty Dispute
Dec 30, 2015, 17:03
11.
Re: Descent Royalty Dispute Dec 30, 2015, 17:03
Dec 30, 2015, 17:03
 
LurkerLito wrote on Dec 30, 2015, 10:03:
I hate these kinds of deals. I don't blame Parallax at all for doing this but seriously, don't sell the trademark name without the dam game. Now this game is basically in limbo and can never be sold again till their dispute is done. Parallax can't sell it because it would be trademark infringement, Interplay can't sell it cause it would be copyright infringement. I am pretty sure it is crap like this that keeps old games like NoLF near impossible to find the "owners".
To be fair, 21 years ago no one was thinking about digital distribution as we have it now. Neither was anyone thinking Interplay would end up being a scumbag deadbeat.
10.
 
Re: Descent Royalty Dispute
Dec 30, 2015, 16:32
10.
Re: Descent Royalty Dispute Dec 30, 2015, 16:32
Dec 30, 2015, 16:32
 
Kevin Lowe wrote on Dec 30, 2015, 15:13:
verybad1 wrote on Dec 30, 2015, 14:14:
Uhh, Descent had it's day, but is there seriously ANY purpose for having a concern about money from those old games now? I can't imagine playing them now myself, they're just TOO effing old...
Why not? It's practically free money. There are plenty of people who still love old games, myself included, and will pay a token sum for someone to slickly package them up for modern PCs.

Same here. I still have a ton of old games I love playing to this day, but it's getting harder and hard to do so due to compatibility issues. I'm a big fan of any effort to make classic games playable again and don't mind throwing a few dollars at them when needed.
9.
 
Re: Descent Royalty Dispute
Dec 30, 2015, 15:24
9.
Re: Descent Royalty Dispute Dec 30, 2015, 15:24
Dec 30, 2015, 15:24
 
Parallax Abstraction wrote on Dec 30, 2015, 14:29:
Interplay lost their dispute with Bethesda because they didn't get the MMO to the milestones they had to so I believe Bethesda owns the whole thing now. They probably sold off what little they had to whoever is now apparently not developing Earthrise any more.

Yes, you are correct... I was just following the trail of "Project V13", which was originally the Fallout MMO, and stating it's apparent current status. ... or non-status, if you like.
Get your games from GOG DAMMIT!
Avatar 19499
8.
 
Re: Descent Royalty Dispute
Dec 30, 2015, 15:22
8.
Re: Descent Royalty Dispute Dec 30, 2015, 15:22
Dec 30, 2015, 15:22
 
LurkerLito wrote on Dec 30, 2015, 10:03:
I hate these kinds of deals. I don't blame Parallax at all for doing this but seriously, don't sell the trademark name without the dam game. Now this game is basically in limbo and can never be sold again till their dispute is done. Parallax can't sell it because it would be trademark infringement, Interplay can't sell it cause it would be copyright infringement. I am pretty sure it is crap like this that keeps old games like NoLF near impossible to find the "owners".

Exactly. And it's just bad business. Who would ever agree to such a deal knowing this is precisely the kind of thing that can happen. It's an all or nothing affair.
"The horse I bet on was so slow, the jockey kept a diary of the trip." - Henny Youngman
7.
 
Re: Descent Royalty Dispute
Dec 30, 2015, 15:13
7.
Re: Descent Royalty Dispute Dec 30, 2015, 15:13
Dec 30, 2015, 15:13
 
verybad1 wrote on Dec 30, 2015, 14:14:
Uhh, Descent had it's day, but is there seriously ANY purpose for having a concern about money from those old games now? I can't imagine playing them now myself, they're just TOO effing old...
Why not? It's practically free money. There are plenty of people who still love old games, myself included, and will pay a token sum for someone to slickly package them up for modern PCs.
6.
 
Re: Descent Royalty Dispute
Dec 30, 2015, 14:29
6.
Re: Descent Royalty Dispute Dec 30, 2015, 14:29
Dec 30, 2015, 14:29
 
wtf_man wrote on Dec 30, 2015, 13:46:
CJ_Parker wrote on Dec 30, 2015, 11:56:
How's that Fallout MMO coming along, Herve??

Bwwwaaaaaahahahahahahahaaaaahahahahaaa


Well... it apparently turned into Earthrise... Masthead and Interplay don't seem to be involved anymore... Last Blog entry is on April 2014 and the forums are offline.

I'd have to say "It's dead, Jim"

Interplay lost their dispute with Bethesda because they didn't get the MMO to the milestones they had to so I believe Bethesda owns the whole thing now. They probably sold off what little they had to whoever is now apparently not developing Earthrise any more.
Parallax Abstraction
Twitch | YouTube | Podcast
Avatar 13614
5.
 
Re: Descent Royalty Dispute
Dec 30, 2015, 14:14
5.
Re: Descent Royalty Dispute Dec 30, 2015, 14:14
Dec 30, 2015, 14:14
 
Uhh, Descent had it's day, but is there seriously ANY purpose for having a concern about money from those old games now? I can't imagine playing them now myself, they're just TOO effing old...
4.
 
Re: Descent Royalty Dispute
Dec 30, 2015, 13:46
4.
Re: Descent Royalty Dispute Dec 30, 2015, 13:46
Dec 30, 2015, 13:46
 
CJ_Parker wrote on Dec 30, 2015, 11:56:
How's that Fallout MMO coming along, Herve??

Bwwwaaaaaahahahahahahahaaaaahahahahaaa


Well... it apparently turned into Earthrise... Masthead and Interplay don't seem to be involved anymore... Last Blog entry is on April 2014 and the forums are offline.

I'd have to say "It's dead, Jim"
Get your games from GOG DAMMIT!
Avatar 19499
3.
 
Re: Descent Royalty Dispute
Dec 30, 2015, 11:56
3.
Re: Descent Royalty Dispute Dec 30, 2015, 11:56
Dec 30, 2015, 11:56
 
How's that Fallout MMO coming along, Herve??

Bwwwaaaaaahahahahahahahaaaaahahahahaaa

2.
 
Re: Descent Royalty Dispute
Dec 30, 2015, 10:27
2.
Re: Descent Royalty Dispute Dec 30, 2015, 10:27
Dec 30, 2015, 10:27
 
Interplay screwing people over? Why, I never...!
Avatar 15604
1.
 
Re: Descent Royalty Dispute
Dec 30, 2015, 10:03
1.
Re: Descent Royalty Dispute Dec 30, 2015, 10:03
Dec 30, 2015, 10:03
 
I hate these kinds of deals. I don't blame Parallax at all for doing this but seriously, don't sell the trademark name without the dam game. Now this game is basically in limbo and can never be sold again till their dispute is done. Parallax can't sell it because it would be trademark infringement, Interplay can't sell it cause it would be copyright infringement. I am pretty sure it is crap like this that keeps old games like NoLF near impossible to find the "owners".
Avatar 56985
16 Replies. 1 pages. Viewing page 1.
Newer [  1  ] Older