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.
Older [  1  2  ] Newer
1.
 
Re: CIG's Star Citizen Rebuttal to Crytek
Jan 19, 2020, 13:06
1.
Re: CIG's Star Citizen Rebuttal to Crytek Jan 19, 2020, 13:06
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.
"The price of freedom is eternal vigilance."
Avatar 22891
2.
 
Re: CIG's Star Citizen Rebuttal to Crytek
Jan 19, 2020, 13:10
2.
Re: CIG's Star Citizen Rebuttal to Crytek Jan 19, 2020, 13:10
Jan 19, 2020, 13:10
 
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.
If only someone had said this was a frivolous lawsuit.
- I refer to it as BC, Before Corona, and AD, After Disaster. -
Avatar 58135
3.
 
Re: CIG's Star Citizen Rebuttal to Crytek
Jan 19, 2020, 13:12
3.
Re: CIG's Star Citizen Rebuttal to Crytek Jan 19, 2020, 13:12
Jan 19, 2020, 13:12
 
RedEye9 wrote on Jan 19, 2020, 13:10:
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.
If only someone had said this was a frivolous lawsuit.
Indeed.
"The price of freedom is eternal vigilance."
Avatar 22891
4.
 
removed
Jan 19, 2020, 13:31
4.
removed Jan 19, 2020, 13:31
Jan 19, 2020, 13:31
 
* REMOVED *
This comment was deleted on Jan 19, 2020, 13:55.
5.
 
Re: CIG's Star Citizen Rebuttal to Crytek
Jan 19, 2020, 13:36
5.
Re: CIG's Star Citizen Rebuttal to Crytek Jan 19, 2020, 13:36
Jan 19, 2020, 13:36
 
Bad bot! Naughty bot!
Its not the cough that carries you off but the coffin they carry you off in.
6.
 
Re: CIG's Star Citizen Rebuttal to Crytek
Jan 19, 2020, 14:16
6.
Re: CIG's Star Citizen Rebuttal to Crytek Jan 19, 2020, 14:16
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.

"You have enemies? Good. That means you’ve stood up for something, sometime in your life."
Avatar 25394
7.
 
Re: CIG's Star Citizen Rebuttal to Crytek
Jan 19, 2020, 16:27
7.
Re: CIG's Star Citizen Rebuttal to Crytek Jan 19, 2020, 16:27
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.
COVID infections: 133M - - - COVID deaths: 3M - - - Death rate: 2%
Vaccines administered: 711M - - - Vaccine deaths: 7 - - - Death rate: 0.00000001%
Your choice is clear.
Avatar 22024
8.
 
Re: CIG's Star Citizen Rebuttal to Crytek
Jan 19, 2020, 16:53
8.
Re: CIG's Star Citizen Rebuttal to Crytek Jan 19, 2020, 16:53
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.
"You have enemies? Good. That means you’ve stood up for something, sometime in your life."
Avatar 25394
9.
 
Re: CIG's Star Citizen Rebuttal to Crytek
Jan 19, 2020, 17:15
Kxmode
 
9.
Re: CIG's Star Citizen Rebuttal to Crytek Jan 19, 2020, 17:15
Jan 19, 2020, 17:15
 Kxmode
 
Looks like a case from the Law Offices of Bicker, Back & Forthe.
"Hard times create strong men. Strong men create good times. Good times create weak men. And, weak men create hard times." - Those Who Remain by G. Michael Hopf
Avatar 18786
10.
 
Re: CIG's Star Citizen Rebuttal to Crytek
Jan 19, 2020, 17:16
10.
Re: CIG's Star Citizen Rebuttal to Crytek Jan 19, 2020, 17:16
Jan 19, 2020, 17:16
 
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.
11.
 
Re: CIG's Star Citizen Rebuttal to Crytek
Jan 19, 2020, 18:19
11.
Re: CIG's Star Citizen Rebuttal to Crytek Jan 19, 2020, 18:19
Jan 19, 2020, 18:19
 
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.
It is well known that I don't make mistakes--so, if you should happen across an error in something I have written, you can be confident in the fact that *I* did not write it.
Avatar 16008
12.
 
Re: CIG's Star Citizen Rebuttal to Crytek
Jan 19, 2020, 18:27
12.
Re: CIG's Star Citizen Rebuttal to Crytek Jan 19, 2020, 18:27
Jan 19, 2020, 18:27
 
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.
"You have enemies? Good. That means you’ve stood up for something, sometime in your life."
Avatar 25394
13.
 
Re: CIG's Star Citizen Rebuttal to Crytek
Jan 19, 2020, 19:40
13.
Re: CIG's Star Citizen Rebuttal to Crytek Jan 19, 2020, 19:40
Jan 19, 2020, 19:40
 
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.
14.
 
Re: CIG's Star Citizen Rebuttal to Crytek
Jan 20, 2020, 04:01
14.
Re: CIG's Star Citizen Rebuttal to Crytek Jan 20, 2020, 04:01
Jan 20, 2020, 04:01
 
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.
"The price of freedom is eternal vigilance."
Avatar 22891
15.
 
Re: CIG's Star Citizen Rebuttal to Crytek
Jan 20, 2020, 09:22
15.
Re: CIG's Star Citizen Rebuttal to Crytek Jan 20, 2020, 09:22
Jan 20, 2020, 09:22
 
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.
16.
 
Re: CIG's Star Citizen Rebuttal to Crytek
Jan 20, 2020, 09:51
16.
Re: CIG's Star Citizen Rebuttal to Crytek Jan 20, 2020, 09:51
Jan 20, 2020, 09:51
 
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
17.
 
Re: CIG's Star Citizen Rebuttal to Crytek
Jan 20, 2020, 12:08
Kxmode
 
17.
Re: CIG's Star Citizen Rebuttal to Crytek Jan 20, 2020, 12:08
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.
"Hard times create strong men. Strong men create good times. Good times create weak men. And, weak men create hard times." - Those Who Remain by G. Michael Hopf
Avatar 18786
18.
 
Re: CIG's Star Citizen Rebuttal to Crytek
Jan 20, 2020, 12:16
18.
Re: CIG's Star Citizen Rebuttal to Crytek Jan 20, 2020, 12:16
Jan 20, 2020, 12:16
 
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
19.
 
Re: CIG's Star Citizen Rebuttal to Crytek
Jan 20, 2020, 12:22
19.
Re: CIG's Star Citizen Rebuttal to Crytek Jan 20, 2020, 12:22
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.
Avatar 56308
20.
 
Re: CIG's Star Citizen Rebuttal to Crytek
Jan 20, 2020, 12:29
20.
Re: CIG's Star Citizen Rebuttal to Crytek Jan 20, 2020, 12:29
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.
“Extinction is the rule. Survival is the exception.” -- Carl Sagan
28 Replies. 2 pages. Viewing page 1.
Older [  1  2  ] Newer