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

Crytek's Star Citizen Lawsuit Follow-up

A legal memorandum from Crytek asks the courts for a voluntary dismissal of the lawsuit against Cloud Imperium Games they filed two years ago (thanks RiSC1911 on Reddit via Eurogamer). Their complaint was based on CIG's plans to create two games, Star Citizen and Squadron 42, after licensing the CryENGINE for only one game. Now they are seeking to shelve the matter until Squadron 42 is officially released, whenever that might be. Word is:
Crytek seeks to voluntarily dismiss its claims without prejudice to re-filing those claims upon the actual release of Squadron 42. No efforts taken to date will be lost, and no legally cognizable prejudice will occur. Crytek’s requested relief will promote judicial economy by allowing all claims to proceed as a unit once the Squadron 42 claims become fully ripe upon CIG’s release of that game.

This case has been marked by a pattern of CIG saying one thing in its public statements and another in this litigation. For example, at the outset of this case, CIG had publicly claimed it had switched to using the Lumberyard Engine for both Star Citizen and Squadron 42, but was forced to confirm during this litigation that no such switch had taken place. See Crytek’s Response to CIG’s Motion for Bond, Dkt. 74 at 1; CIG’s Reply in support of Motion for Bond, Dkt. 74, at 8 (“Crytek makes much of the fact that the code is the same . . .”). The fact that CIG denied Crytek the credits to which it was due under the parties GLA without actually switching game engines is the basis for Crytek’s “credits claim” in this case.