Send News. Want a reply? Read this. More in the FAQ.   News Forum - All Forums - RSS Headlines   RSS Headlines   Twitter   Twitter

CIG's Star Citizen Rebuttal to Crytek

Eurogamer reports on a new court document (which inspires a warning from Google, so use caution) filed by Cloud Imperium Games in response to Crytek's recent motion to dismiss their own lawsuit (thanks Korrd). The suit concerns whether CIG properly licensed the CryENGINE for Star Citizen and Squadron 42, their upcoming space games. Crytek asked the suit be dismissed without prejudice so it can be reopened in the future. Cloud Imperium is seeking a dismissal with prejudice, which would end the case for good and force Crytek to compensate them for some of their legal costs. Here's some of Eurogamer's summary of the new filing:
Following Crytek's motion to dismiss its own lawsuit, CIG has had its say, and in a strongly-worded court document moved to discredit Crytek's lawsuit. It described it as "meritless in light of CIG's separate licence with Amazon", and insisted GLA expressly grants CIG the right to use CryEngine and to develop Squadron 42.

CIG said in May 2019, Crytek "sheepishly and belatedly" emailed Amazon to ask if it had truly granted CIG a licence covering prior versions of CryEngine as well as Lumberyard. According to CIG, in that email, "Crytek conceded that an affirmative answer would likely tank its Squadron 42 claim." Amazon confirmed it licensed Lumberyard to CIG in 2016 - and that it included CryEngine in that licence.

"CIG's separate licence with Amazon operates as a complete defense against Crytek's remaining claims so they too never should have been brought," CIG says.

"Instead of acting responsibly even at that late moment, Crytek persisted, fought the bond motion, and dithered another seven months before bringing this motion."
View
28 Replies. 2 pages. Viewing page 1.
< Newer [ 1 2 ] Older >


28. Re: CIG's Star Citizen Rebuttal to Crytek Jan 22, 2020, 02:40  Kxmode 
 
RedEye9 wrote on Jan 20, 2020, 18:14:
theyarecomingforyou wrote on Jan 20, 2020, 18:09:
By the way, Leonard French has also put up an analysis of this update to the case.
Awesome, nothing beats getting info from an actual lawyer who is well versed in contract law.
Thanks

Those opening remarks by Ortwin Freyermuth are brutal. "Crytek should not be allowed to aim its car at CIG's storefront window, stomp the accelerator, smash through, do donuts for years, then back out and drive away to maybe circle around and crash into CIG another day." Savage.
 
Avatar 18786
 



William Shakespeare's "Star Wars" Act I, Scene 1: Aboard the rebel ship. / Enter C-3PO and R2-D2. / C-3PO: "Now is the summer of our happiness / Made winter by this sudden, fierce attack!" / R2-D2 Beep beep, Beep, beep, meep, squeak, beep, whee!
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 

27. Re: CIG's Star Citizen Rebuttal to Crytek Jan 20, 2020, 23:13 Drayth
 
41:20


...just sayin'
 
Avatar 36713
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 

26. Re: CIG's Star Citizen Rebuttal to Crytek Jan 20, 2020, 18:14  RedEye9 
 
theyarecomingforyou wrote on Jan 20, 2020, 18:09:
By the way, Leonard French has also put up an analysis of this update to the case.
Awesome, nothing beats getting info from an actual lawyer who is well versed in contract law.
Thanks
 
Avatar 58135
 



Vaccines Cause Immunity
Welcome to the Anthropocene
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 

25. Re: CIG's Star Citizen Rebuttal to Crytek Jan 20, 2020, 18:09  theyarecomingforyou 
 
Kxmode wrote on Jan 20, 2020, 12:08:
theyarecomingforyou wrote on Jan 19, 2020, 13:06:
Now we have confirmation from Amazon that not only did it licence Lumberyard to CIG (which was publicly known) but also CryEngine, meaning that CIG cannot be in breach of the GLA with Crytek. Not that Crytek's claim had any merit, as the GLA specifically included Star Citizen AND Squadron 42.

Crytek attempted to extort CIG and now it looks like it will be on the hook for over $500,000 in legal costs, possibly a lot more. Crytek should be focused on paying its own employees rather than filing baseless lawsuits that will create even more of a blackhole in its finances.

Welcome back to the discussion forums.
I loiter.

By the way, Leonard French has also put up an analysis of this update to the case.
 
Avatar 22891
 



"The price of freedom is eternal vigilance."
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 

24. Re: CIG's Star Citizen Rebuttal to Crytek Jan 20, 2020, 15:56 clint
 
afraid to say Epic store for CIG makes sense in terms of wringing out every dollar. Cig already have their very successful store. Epic would give more exposure and they seem happy to allow other stores as long as its not steam. Then on steam as another launch. I dont like it, but it makes sense.  
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 

23. Re: CIG's Star Citizen Rebuttal to Crytek Jan 20, 2020, 14:11 Dev
 
Primalchrome wrote on Jan 20, 2020, 12:22:
I just want a Blues Post that says that Star Citizen is coming to Epic Games Store... I don't think the site could handle the level of salt that would generate.

CIG would consider doing that in a heartbeat, since epic offers a chunk of upfront cash to do it, and CIG would keep more of each sale. Plus, most serious fans already purchased stuff from them, so it's not like they are going to lose much exposure.

I hadn't thought about it, but now that I have, I'm just going to assume that's going to happen.
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 

22. Re: CIG's Star Citizen Rebuttal to Crytek Jan 20, 2020, 13:19  RedEye9 
 
Mr. Tact wrote on Jan 20, 2020, 12:29:
Primalchrome wrote on Jan 20, 2020, 12:22:
I just want a Blues Post that says that Star Citizen is coming to Epic Games Store... I don't think the site could handle the level of salt that would generate.
For free! LOL.
doubt Id snagg it
 
Avatar 58135
 



Vaccines Cause Immunity
Welcome to the Anthropocene
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 

21. Re: CIG's Star Citizen Rebuttal to Crytek Jan 20, 2020, 12:43  Kxmode 
 
Mr. Tact wrote on Jan 20, 2020, 12:29:
Primalchrome wrote on Jan 20, 2020, 12:22:
I just want a Blues Post that says that Star Citizen is coming to Epic Games Store... I don't think the site could handle the level of salt that would generate.
For free! LOL.

oh gawd
 
Avatar 18786
 



William Shakespeare's "Star Wars" Act I, Scene 1: Aboard the rebel ship. / Enter C-3PO and R2-D2. / C-3PO: "Now is the summer of our happiness / Made winter by this sudden, fierce attack!" / R2-D2 Beep beep, Beep, beep, meep, squeak, beep, whee!
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 

20. Re: CIG's Star Citizen Rebuttal to Crytek Jan 20, 2020, 12:29  Mr. Tact 
 
Primalchrome wrote on Jan 20, 2020, 12:22:
I just want a Blues Post that says that Star Citizen is coming to Epic Games Store... I don't think the site could handle the level of salt that would generate.
For free! LOL.
 



Truth is brutal. Prepare for pain.
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 

19. Re: CIG's Star Citizen Rebuttal to Crytek Jan 20, 2020, 12:22  Primalchrome 
 
I just want a Blues Post that says that Star Citizen is coming to Epic Games Store... I don't think the site could handle the level of salt that would generate.  
Avatar 56308
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 

18. Re: CIG's Star Citizen Rebuttal to Crytek Jan 20, 2020, 12:16 Korrd
 
The Pyro wrote on Jan 20, 2020, 09:51:
The GLA specifically mentions Squadon 42 as a feature, but if CIG breaks it off into a standalone game with its own client interface then that does indeed look like a violation of the agreement.
Does it? From the second line of the GLA (page 7):
WHEREAS Licensee desires to use, and Crytek desires to grant the license to use, the "CryEngine" for the game currently entitled "Space Citizen" and its related space fighter game "Squadron 42," together hereafter the "Game"...
That seems unambiguous to me and I see nothing in the GLA or its amendments that alters the context of the statement. The court would seem to agree, given that its essentially called BS on each of Crytek's claims. I suspect that's the real reason Crytek wants to dismiss, but are doing so under the guise of ripeness to try and avoid financial liability from bringing a frivolous lawsuit.
 
Avatar 57257
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 

17. Re: CIG's Star Citizen Rebuttal to Crytek Jan 20, 2020, 12:08  Kxmode 
 
theyarecomingforyou wrote on Jan 19, 2020, 13:06:
Now we have confirmation from Amazon that not only did it licence Lumberyard to CIG (which was publicly known) but also CryEngine, meaning that CIG cannot be in breach of the GLA with Crytek. Not that Crytek's claim had any merit, as the GLA specifically included Star Citizen AND Squadron 42.

Crytek attempted to extort CIG and now it looks like it will be on the hook for over $500,000 in legal costs, possibly a lot more. Crytek should be focused on paying its own employees rather than filing baseless lawsuits that will create even more of a blackhole in its finances.

Welcome back to the discussion forums.
 
Avatar 18786
 



William Shakespeare's "Star Wars" Act I, Scene 1: Aboard the rebel ship. / Enter C-3PO and R2-D2. / C-3PO: "Now is the summer of our happiness / Made winter by this sudden, fierce attack!" / R2-D2 Beep beep, Beep, beep, meep, squeak, beep, whee!
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 

16. Re: CIG's Star Citizen Rebuttal to Crytek Jan 20, 2020, 09:51  The Pyro 
 
Obligatory IANAL.

Eww, messy. The GLA grants CIG the right to use the engine for all features contained within the Star Citizen client. The GLA specifically mentions Squadon 42 as a feature, but if CIG breaks it off into a standalone game with its own client interface then that does indeed look like a violation of the agreement.

Technically you could probably work around that restriction by just wrapping everything up in a simplistic launcher, but if CIG intends to sell Squadron 42 as a standalone install then that looks like a clear violation of "the Game does not include any content being sold or marketed separately." DLC is allowable, but S42 doesn't look like DLC to me (at the moment) because CIG is selling a S42 package that doesn't even include Star Citizen as a download.
 
Avatar 6134
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 

15. Re: CIG's Star Citizen Rebuttal to Crytek Jan 20, 2020, 09:22 Citizen P
 
This scenario reminds me of time Interplay was reduced down to the owners of the name, and lawyers - existing solely to litigate to pay themselves: namely trying to get their hands on the Fallout money when Beth released FO3 (specially when Beth starting selling the original games, and their 'attempt' to make a Fallout Online, before the rights went to Beth).

Crytek is a slightly better position, but more or less the same thing - frivolous lawsuits in a pathetic attempt for an out of court settlement to shut-up.
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 

14. Re: CIG's Star Citizen Rebuttal to Crytek Jan 20, 2020, 04:01  theyarecomingforyou 
 
Cutter wrote on Jan 19, 2020, 18:27:
Hadn't seen that, thanks. Seems to me section 2.4 of that agreement covers CIGs obligations pretty specifically. And there is nothing in the amendments that changes that.
You'd be wrong. See here for a legal analysis: YouTuber Law.

Contract law has specific interpretations established over decades to define common contractual language. That's why it's important to consider the opinions of legal experts.

Please watch the video I linked to above and then explain to me how CIG is in breach of that provision.
 
Avatar 22891
 



"The price of freedom is eternal vigilance."
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 

13. Re: CIG's Star Citizen Rebuttal to Crytek Jan 19, 2020, 19:40 clint
 
I can kinda see a damages argument for Crytek as CIG has been quite open about the amount of rewriting they had to do to try to fit the ever evolving game into it. There are a lot of youtube cig videos with the programmers mentioning they had to rewrite most of the coding to do what they needed. Eventually changing engine to lumberyard to fulfill the job, and I sense they wished they started with something else. That is CIGs fault as the engine was likely fine for its very initial idea of a wing commander space sim. If you are a developer you would at least start second guessing using the crytek engine after that, especially with the pressure epic is making. True or not that is a bit of PR damage.
Crytek cant compete at the moment on its engines, and have lost most of its talented peoples to other companies. They dumped a lot of their studios and are in freefall until they can get their name back. Star citizen was supposed to do it for them.

I think the fact that the lumberyard engine exists does show how bad a state the cryengine is in. Amazons Lumberyard website mentions nothing of crytek. Lumberyard is a heavy rewrite of the cryengine with crytek licence but gives away for free*(but have to use amazons web services) . and any mention of lumberyard in the crytek forums is removed immediately.

Panic stations at crytek.



This comment was edited on Jan 19, 2020, 20:00.
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 

12. Re: CIG's Star Citizen Rebuttal to Crytek Jan 19, 2020, 18:27 Cutter
 
Choobeastia wrote on Jan 19, 2020, 17:16:
They have released to the court and public viewing the GLA, or game license agreement, which is the contract between CIG and Crytek. The court ruled previously that the GLA does not require CIG to use Cryengine as provided by Crytek, but rather allows them to do so.

Hadn't seen that, thanks. Seems to me section 2.4 of that agreement covers CIGs obligations pretty specifically. And there is nothing in the amendments that changes that.
 
Avatar 25394
 



"Listen, Im not the nicest guy in the Universe because Im the smartest. And being nice is something stupid people do to hedge their bets." - Rick Sanchez
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 

11. Re: CIG's Star Citizen Rebuttal to Crytek Jan 19, 2020, 18:19 WaltC
 
IMO, Crytek also has no choice but to put the suit off until CIG actually ships a game, because so far they cannot show any damages by anything CIG has done or failed to do.  
Avatar 16008
 



It is well known universally that I do not make mistakes--so, if you should happen across an error in that which I have written, please be assured that *I* did not write it!...:)
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 

10. Re: CIG's Star Citizen Rebuttal to Crytek Jan 19, 2020, 17:16 Choobeastia
 
Cutter wrote on Jan 19, 2020, 16:53:
jdreyer wrote on Jan 19, 2020, 16:27:
Cutter wrote on Jan 19, 2020, 14:16:
theyarecomingforyou wrote on Jan 19, 2020, 13:06:
Now we have confirmation from Amazon that not only did it licence Lumberyard to CIG (which was publicly known) but also CryEngine, meaning that CIG cannot be in breach of the GLA with Crytek. Not that Crytek's claim had any merit, as the GLA specifically included Star Citizen AND Squadron 42.

Crytek attempted to extort CIG and now it looks like it will be on the hook for over $500,000 in legal costs, possibly a lot more. Crytek should be focused on paying its own employees rather than filing baseless lawsuits that will create even more of a blackhole in its finances.

Are you privy to the original contract between Crytek and CIG? If not than how would you possibly know? All I've seen is the usual convoluted mess of their PR people engaging in he said/she said.

Haven't they been releasing the contract text? I could have sworn I read some of it last year.

Since when are contract specifics public knowledge? Anywhere? All I've read since this bullshit began is claim vs. counterclaim - same as any public dispute - that's long on claims and short on actual facts.

They have released to the court and public viewing the GLA, or game license agreement, which is the contract between CIG and Crytek. The court ruled previously that the GLA does not require CIG to use Cryengine as provided by Crytek, but rather allows them to do so.
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 

9. Re: CIG's Star Citizen Rebuttal to Crytek Jan 19, 2020, 17:15  Kxmode 
 
Looks like a case from the Law Offices of Bicker, Back & Forthe.  
Avatar 18786
 



William Shakespeare's "Star Wars" Act I, Scene 1: Aboard the rebel ship. / Enter C-3PO and R2-D2. / C-3PO: "Now is the summer of our happiness / Made winter by this sudden, fierce attack!" / R2-D2 Beep beep, Beep, beep, meep, squeak, beep, whee!
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
28 Replies. 2 pages. Viewing page 1.
< Newer [ 1 2 ] Older >