theyarecomingforyou wrote on Sep 2, 2018, 19:14:
As I pointed out, neither said it would be dismissed at the Motion to Dismiss but that the claims were weak.
Nice backtracking there, pal
Nothing has changed with the court's ruling.
LOL! Really? A FEDERAL JUDGE found that, contrary to what you guys keep spouting, the Crytek lawsuit had merits. To the extent that she only dismissed 2 of out 6 claims - of which one was immaterial, and another was replaced.
And how convenient that you refuse to state what you expect the outcome to be. How much will CIG have to pay out? Will development of the game shut down? Will Crytek be given access to CIG's source code? Come on, for someone who has all the answers you seem pretty shy about giving an answer.
Except for the part where, since I was the one who broke the news on the lawsuit, and have written SEVERAL articles about it since Dec 2017? In fact, there is a "Crytek v CIG/RSI
" section on my forum dedicated specifically to the case, and which contains links to all my articles about each aspect of the case, each filing etc. You think I'm going to repeat them here for you? LOL!!! Dude, just click - and read. They are all in chrono order even.
1) I don't know how much CIG will pay out. And even if there is a settlement - which I do NOT see happening - that settlement won't be public. They never are. Only jury or court awards are made public via court filings. I already estimated that I don't see Crytek settling for anything less than $100M specifically due to a) precedent in cases like this b) the monetary damages are based on what CIG has benefited. In this case, we're at $192M and counting. All free money.
2) If Crytek win any aspect of this lawsuit, I fully expect that the development will end simply because the claims go beyond monetary damages.
3) Crytek WILL gain access to the source code via discovery. This part isn't even in dispute. Aside from the fact that the GLA always entitled them to the source code - and CIG isn't even disputing that. It's actually in their (CIG) own filing where they claimed they have been giving Crytek code drops; which Crytek says are bs and don't compile. You should read my last article
on the case for the context of this, and just how destructive it's going to be for CIG - hence the reason they keep staling discovery, while trying to get Crytek to the settlement table without success.
Yes, hence why I asked whether you had given you completely misrepresented what they actually said. As always you just hear what you want to hear.
Except that's FALSE; and I already provided links to what I stated, what they stated, how they were wrong etc. You can ignore it all you want, I don't care because you're already arguing in bad faith; and I'm just here to keep throwing it all in your face.
When legal experts point out that Crytek was concealing information from the court and has a weak case you hear 'this will put CIG out of business' and starting drooling.
First, that's completely FALSE, as Crytek didn't hide anything. And second, the "legal experts" aren't more experienced than a FEDERAL JUDGE who didn't come up with ANY such findings in the Crytek complaint or 1) she would have flagged it 2) she would have granted CIG their completely MtD dismissal.
That's fine but everyone else here is free to watch the videos for themselves and others have pointed out exactly what I have, that they never claimed the Motion to Dismiss would stop all claims.
Others? You mean you and that dude who posted the video that French put up with his correction? And which, barely 30 secs from the link the dude posted, French gave the MtD 60/40 of success? This was the SAME French who, after making all kinds of dismissive claims, went back and did another video retraction in support of what I called him out on? LOL!! Man, you're on a roll today.
You can try to Trump your way through discussions by telling lies endlessly one after another but nobody here has the patience for that and you'll just be ignored. You're not important.
I have been posted facts. That you choose to ignore them, while engaging in circular arguments, is your problem, not mine. My guess is that people who give a shit long enough to read this exchange, can make up their own minds about the merits and facts of what you and I are both arguing about.
I'd rather shove a screwdriver down my japseye than visit your website.
Right. So don't blame me because you're ignorant of the things I've written, THEN try to claim otherwise.
Which is precisely what you're doing. You're ignoring the arguments and FACTS, by engaging in strawman and circular arguments because, like the train-wreck that is Star Citizen, it's as if you expect those things to become true by virtue of your repeating them while perched on a shaky flawed stance.
Game developers are just human beings who happen to make games for a living. If you want to hold us up to higher standards of conduct, then go ahead
...but don't be surprised if we don't uphold them