Author Topic: CryTek v CIG/RSI  (Read 299129 times)

Penny579

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 57
Re: CryTek v RSI/CIG
« Reply #285 on: August 15, 2018, 06:20:15 PM »
Does anyone have a source for the two brothers inc in paying refunds, I had accepted it as fact but when asked about I could not find any evidence of it online.


dsmart

  • Supreme Cmdr
  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4915
    • Smart Speak Blog
Re: CryTek v RSI/CIG
« Reply #286 on: August 16, 2018, 03:40:36 AM »
Does anyone have a source for the two brothers inc in paying refunds, I had accepted it as fact but when asked about I could not find any evidence of it online.

You don't need evidence, as that would imply getting people to post private emails. It's a fact. A LOT of people paid to and received refunds from it. Go search on Reddit.
Star Citizen isn't a game. It's a TV show about a bunch of characters making a game. It's basically "This is Spinal Tap" - except people think the band is real.

G8623

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 1
Re: CryTek v RSI/CIG
« Reply #287 on: August 16, 2018, 05:07:29 AM »
Are the damages really bad that will come from this? There are some on reddit saying a 2 million value.

N0mad

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 597
Re: CryTek v RSI/CIG
« Reply #288 on: August 16, 2018, 05:35:55 AM »
Are the damages really bad that will come from this? There are some on reddit saying a 2 million value.

This would be the same people on Reddit who have convinced themselves that this was still a win for CIG.

They're all idiots.

dexatron

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 40
Re: CryTek v RSI/CIG
« Reply #289 on: August 16, 2018, 06:27:29 AM »
The stupidity on Reddit is incredible, the best comment I've come across:

"All Skadden is trying to do with their Opposition is to prevent the Motion to Dismiss from succeeding. Nothing more, nothing less. This isn't the trial and Skadden will want to give as little insight as possible into their future course of action."

Your work is going to fill a large part of your life, and the only way to be truly satisfied is to do what you believe is great work. And the only way to do great work is to love what you do

dsmart

  • Supreme Cmdr
  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4915
    • Smart Speak Blog
Re: CryTek v RSI/CIG
« Reply #290 on: August 16, 2018, 07:13:20 AM »
Are the damages really bad that will come from this? There are some on reddit saying a 2 million value.

If it was $2M, CIG would have settled this back in 2016-2017. It's not like they didn't have the money to do so.

No, it's not $2M. It's going to be way higher than that. Plus, if Crytek re-file (as the judge suggested) to re-word their complaint as per 2.1.2 (granted in the MtD) and 2.4, while explaining why they are due punitive damages (granted in the MtD), we're talking much, much higher awards.

For comparison (and this was years ago, and their are higher awards now per precedent), this is what a court awarded Epic Games in their suit against Silicon Knights for basically the same issue.

https://www.engadget.com/2012/11/09/silicon-knights-v-epic-games-judgment/

The long and short of this is that CIG/RSI are facing a very serious issue that could have long-term ramifications. That they could even hope to settle this for less than $20M, is a pipe-dream; unless of course CryTek are desperate and willing to take whatever they can, plus attorney fees. Even with the punitive damages temporarily off the table – assuming they don’t re-file as per the judge’s suggestion (bottom of last page in the filing) – the breach in Section 2.4 alone is already a major slam dunk. Combining that with copyright infringement as it pertains to SQ42 being a separate game, the damages go through the roof. For context and comparison (and that was back in 2012), Epic Games won massive damages (later doubled!) against Silicon Knights, and bankrupted the company in the end. And they took advantage of the injunctive relief, forcing SK – via court order – to remove and destroy all their products from market. That’s how bad this is. That we’re in 2018, where new precedent for damages have been set and won, well you can guess the rest.

ps: Those clowns on Reddit are clueless. Best not to pay attention to them as they have zero incentive to be forthcoming even if they knew wtf they were talking about. Those were the same guys saying Crytek had no case. The judge just proved that not to be the case, and even pointed Crytek to an ever bigger claim (section 2.4) which Crytek wasn't even going for.
« Last Edit: August 16, 2018, 07:51:19 AM by dsmart »
Star Citizen isn't a game. It's a TV show about a bunch of characters making a game. It's basically "This is Spinal Tap" - except people think the band is real.

dsmart

  • Supreme Cmdr
  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4915
    • Smart Speak Blog
Re: CryTek v RSI/CIG
« Reply #291 on: August 16, 2018, 07:20:33 AM »
The stupidity on Reddit is incredible, the best comment I've come across:

"All Skadden is trying to do with their Opposition is to prevent the Motion to Dismiss from succeeding. Nothing more, nothing less. This isn't the trial and Skadden will want to give as little insight as possible into their future course of action."

Yes - it really is incredible. They're all attorneys. It's Reddit. So.  :shrug:
Star Citizen isn't a game. It's a TV show about a bunch of characters making a game. It's basically "This is Spinal Tap" - except people think the band is real.

StanTheMan

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 676
Re: CryTek v RSI/CIG
« Reply #292 on: August 16, 2018, 06:18:31 PM »
Well done Derek.

What do you know about the games industry again ?


Penny579

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 57
Re: CryTek v RSI/CIG
« Reply #293 on: August 16, 2018, 06:23:36 PM »
You don't need evidence, as that would imply getting people to post private emails. It's a fact. A LOT of people paid to and received refunds from it. Go search on Reddit.

I did this before I asked here, and on google no joy.   I could have sworn I remember saw a someone posting a picture with a cheque from two brothers inc. but it seems to have disappeared, I did not think much of it at the time but actually, I think its pretty big deal if its true.

but when I searched all I can find is one of the mods of the refund sub stating it as a known fact, and your own assertions here.

maybe I just cant internet.


dsmart

  • Supreme Cmdr
  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4915
    • Smart Speak Blog
Re: CryTek v RSI/CIG
« Reply #294 on: August 17, 2018, 04:46:48 AM »
BREAKING! Crytek have now filed a second amended complaint that solidifies their claims. Filing in the OP

They specifically went for what I wrote that they would as per 2.4.

It's funny - and I'm not even a lawyer.

I will have more in a bit.
Star Citizen isn't a game. It's a TV show about a bunch of characters making a game. It's basically "This is Spinal Tap" - except people think the band is real.

dsmart

  • Supreme Cmdr
  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4915
    • Smart Speak Blog
Re: CryTek v RSI/CIG
« Reply #295 on: August 17, 2018, 05:54:21 AM »
There he goes again.


I left him a comment

Quote
This is pure and utter tripe. This is why there are bad and really bad attorneys. You were wrong in ALL of your "legal" arguments regarding this case. Now you're doubling down. I hope the views are worth it. This is a stellar judge with a HISTORY of exceptional rulings across a gamut of low and high profile cases. And here you are disparaging and questioning her ruling on the merits? You're an internet "lawyer". She's a FEDERAL JUDGE! Jeez.

Star Citizen isn't a game. It's a TV show about a bunch of characters making a game. It's basically "This is Spinal Tap" - except people think the band is real.

Meowz

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 75
Re: CryTek v RSI/CIG
« Reply #296 on: August 17, 2018, 08:21:21 AM »
There he goes again.


I left him a comment

Wow, some really toxic replies to your comment. Walked right into the maggot nest there. I don't know why you waste your time typing to those idiots.

dexatron

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 40
Re: CryTek v RSI/CIG
« Reply #297 on: August 17, 2018, 09:05:13 AM »
lol great comment and sarcasm:

Hello, 6K+ Whale here.  I would just like to confirm that it is definitely the decorated federal judges faulty reasoning and we should in no way ever entertain the possibility that CIG is on the hook for any of this. Also please remember that we are all responsible for keeping this lawsuit funded and Chris and Ortwin happy during this trying time.  Reach deep citizens. This will be a long battle but it will be worth it in the end, just think 3 years ago we never would have imagined we'd be able to aimlessly wander between three barren planetoids before crashing to desktop. See you in the verse...
Your work is going to fill a large part of your life, and the only way to be truly satisfied is to do what you believe is great work. And the only way to do great work is to love what you do

Caveat Emptor

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 21
Re: CryTek v RSI/CIG
« Reply #298 on: August 17, 2018, 10:31:23 AM »
Assuming that the financials are filed under seal, if, during Discovery, Crytek come across something that they suspect is criminal, how likely are they to bring this to the attention of the Federal authorities? Would they be required by law to do so?

dsmart

  • Supreme Cmdr
  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4915
    • Smart Speak Blog
Re: CryTek v RSI/CIG
« Reply #299 on: August 17, 2018, 11:42:10 AM »
Wow, some really toxic replies to your comment. Walked right into the maggot nest there. I don't know why you waste your time typing to those idiots.

You mean besides winding them up? :D
Star Citizen isn't a game. It's a TV show about a bunch of characters making a game. It's basically "This is Spinal Tap" - except people think the band is real.

 

SMF spam blocked by CleanTalk