The Ur-Quan Masters Home Page Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
January 25, 2022, 12:47:21 pm
Home Help Search Login Register
News: Paul & Fred have reached a settlement with Stardock!

  Show Posts
Pages: 1 ... 4 5 [6] 7 8
76  The Ur-Quan Masters Re-Release / General UQM Discussion / Re: Stardock Litigation Discussion on: July 18, 2018, 10:21:49 pm
Guessing  you are getting the brad thinks Paul and Fred thought the game would fail thing from either Reddit or Discord?

I hate discord....       rolling chat that if you look away for 10 minutes you can never find anything.


I've read all the publicly posted emails between Brad and Paul and Fred.   It seems that they (P&F) were very very supportive early on, though clear that they could not work with the project in any way due to their contract with Activision.

Things only turned hostile last Sept...        No where in any of that does it look like they were expecting SC:O to fail or doing anything but being supportive of the new project.

So yeah I do think that when they made the GotP announcement Brad tried to spin it as a positive (his initial posts to the media and even on this site where super super supportive)   and then things just turned.... mean.             Either there is a LOT of stuff that has not been made public, or something cause up until Dec it really looked like we'd have two games that mutually acknowledged each other and could happily co-exist.

Now.....   yuck

It would make sense for Fred & Paul to support "Star Control" because the trademark to "Star Control" isn't what's important to them as they have their own plans, all they ultimately want is the copywrite to the original art and stories which they still need to validate. With that copywrite, they could make contemporary versions of a UQM sequel that would count as derivative works, which are protected under the U.S. copywrite laws. Even if they don't make something with their win right away, it's still their legacy on the line whereas Stardock's would have been completely safe in every way.

Even if Stardock loses most of their claims, they will undoubtedly keep their trademark to Star Control so their game will not be jeopardized. If Fred and Paul lose a majority of their battles, they will lose everything. Both parties have a chance to come to an understanding and walk away with what they want, but they are emotionally invested in the dispute.
77  The Ur-Quan Masters Re-Release / General UQM Discussion / Re: Stardock Litigation Discussion on: July 18, 2018, 10:01:28 pm
Oh, the subsequent TM fillings for the alien names etc are a bunch of Bunk.

SD is playing dirty pool without a doubt.

I'm just saying that Paul and Fred were the ones that filled the pool with manure to begin with.  

I don't expect SD to win all of their points cause some of them are flat out ludicrous.  


But from what i've Seen in my own reviews of all of the documents of the case... Paul and Fred brought all of this down on themselves in a fit of spite and pettynes         Remove SC:O from the picture entirely for a moment  lets say SD bought the rights to the game and spent money developing the game but much like Elemental, their goals were not something they could do....   SD has cancelled game projects that were not working  even ones late in development..  (Servo)  Say SD cancelled or greatly delayed development of SC:O

When in that picture do you see an announcement of GotP?

My guess is never.      Words are cheap and easy...  actions matter.   Paul and Fred's actions seem lacking.

Fred and Pual didn't want much to do with Stardock, I also think the CEO is overselling his point when he states Fred and Paul wanted Stardock to fail.

The reality is that Stardock's CEO is a fan of theirs and felt somewhat hurt by rejection as he takes pride in the success of his company. In multiple instances, Stardock very aggressively kept pestering Paul and Fred about working on a new project, and every time, Paul and Fred said they weren't interested and had their own plans & obligations which must have disappointed Stardock.

It is true that it was a bad idea for Paul and Fred to try and use "Star Control" in any way, but everyone makes mistakes and they were probably alarmed by this whole situation as well, so they overreacted.
78  The Ur-Quan Masters Re-Release / General UQM Discussion / Re: Stardock Litigation Discussion on: July 18, 2018, 09:44:45 pm
If that were really the case answer me this...

Why do they not have a story plan or game design elements already made?

The logical pitfall you've presented is similar to the pitfall Stardock expects the trademark office to fall into. You say that just because Paul and Fred currently have artistic content means they've always had that content for Ghost of the Precursors, which may be right or it may be very wrong. However, they've always made important plans for eventual content and almost certainly have drafts they wrote in their own free time, so the copywrite to that material is clearly more important to Paul and Fred than to Stardock.

So in a similar but actually potentially illegal way, Stardock is only now trademarking the Arilou and Chejnesu so that they can pretend they've always planned on those races as an integral part of their game by the time their claims make it to the trademark office, which will be months after Star Control: Origins is released. If you think that's unfair, you're not alone, which means the trademark office will likely also see through that guise if their claims even make it that far.
79  The Ur-Quan Masters Re-Release / General UQM Discussion / Re: Stardock Litigation Discussion on: July 18, 2018, 09:23:47 pm
* In ΒΆ61-63,93, they claim that the fact that Paul hasn't worked on the game during the litigation shows that he never intended to start work on it.  I think this claim is to try to refute an intent to use the "Ghosts of the Precursors" mark by Paul, but I can't believe that getting dragged into litigation wouldn't be considered good cause to have delayed that work.
We found out about Ghost of the Precursors not too long ago, just in 2017. It is fair to point out that Fred and Paul hay have only announced that as a response to Stardock. But, that point is moot because there is 20 years of evidence of Paul and Fred telling fans that they really want to make their own UQM-based game but that circumstances for it weren't favorable, and it's really the art and creative assets that matter for Paul and Fred, not the "Star Control" trademark.
80  The Ur-Quan Masters Re-Release / General UQM Discussion / Re: My take on Stardock on: July 18, 2018, 08:10:18 pm
Simply asking people for their feedback is not "minimally" acceptable, it's across the board accepted by everyone. Have you ever heard of Rotten Tomatoes or IGN? Seems like plenty of people are fine using those sites.
Asking for input with the stated goal of damaging someone? You literally said you were trying to get more negative reviews. I quoted it right to your face and yet you insist that I'm misunderstanding. I can read.

Again, you don't seem to understand that it's okay, people have the right to both ask for and express these ideas. The *intent* isn't to damage, the *intent* is to get feedback with the *hope* that Paul and Fred get funding. A Hollywood producer won't win a suit against either me nor Rotten Tomatoes when I use the reviews on Rotten Tomatoes to judge a movie I decide not to see. Maybe you live in a country with limited freedom so you don't deem such a tactic acceptable, but Stardock is a U.S. company.


And that is enough, as you should know if you actually read what I posted and then reposted for your benefit, though this part wasn't put in italics.

But that's the irony I pointed out which is now more ironic because you didn't understand that. You did undersell your sympathy as if to say there was still an ethical qualm you had with it, which I don't see any reason for unless your upbringing was in a country with more limited freedom.
81  The Ur-Quan Masters Re-Release / General UQM Discussion / Re: Stardock Litigation Discussion on: July 18, 2018, 08:08:41 pm
- I am completely unsurprised to find Stardock ready to invalidate Paul and Fred's copyright. This absolutely would prevent them from creating a new game, under any name. (Whether they will successfully cancel the Copyright is another question). Paul and Fred would basically have to start over with a completely new story and new IP.

Both sides have overreacted in some ways and try to manipulate the public instead of coming to a reasonable conclusion. Fred & Paul aren't completely innocent because they did say negative things about Stardock publicly and even though they're attributed with creating all, they don't bother to correct their fans often.

However, I don't see that they claim to have created every single thing themselves in the first place, and it's uncommon for a creator to claim they did every piece of dirty work. They were in charge of making most of the decisions, wrote most of the story, and were generally trusted with all of creative content by the Accolade staff, much like how a creator employed by a network would be trusted with creating a TV series. Even if they didn't physically make everything themselves, which rarely happens except with indie projects, they are responsible for shaping the original game into what it was, so it still makes sense that they are the original creators of the game.

Stardock wants the trademark to Star Control, and they should be given that after all the work they've done, but all Fred & Paul want is the copywrite to the original work they were a part of, which many want for them and which Stardock doesn't even care about, so the solution should be a no-brainer but they get just as emotional about all of this as Elestan.
82  The Ur-Quan Masters Re-Release / General UQM Discussion / Re: Stardock Litigation Discussion on: July 18, 2018, 09:05:44 am
Thanks for the summary and your other posts, I feel somewhat better informed having read them.

Stardock's position is sounding more ludicrous than before. Mainly that manual bit, the gofundme, the lack of any claim to a licence agreement... If they continue in that direction is there a point where the judge may throw out their sillier claims?

A judge almost certainly wouldn't throw away their claims over how they act on discord or their forums, but the trademark office would likely be professional enough to see through any of the superficial arguments they present anyway. There's still a chance Stardock could win claims to the races apparently if they can argue that F&P never held the copywrite to them, even though it seems they still made final decisions on the story elements, but it's not in their favor. But, Stardock would almost certainly keep SC trademark, they've always had that regardless, many different people agree on that.
83  The Ur-Quan Masters Re-Release / General UQM Discussion / Re: Stardock Litigation Discussion on: July 18, 2018, 08:56:22 am
Fred and Paul will likely win some of the claims it seems, and Stardock will win some of the others. It looks like Stardock will most likely get the SC trademark they bought from auction, which is fine because that's what they built their game around, but that Fred and Paul will likely get the IP to the story elements (eg races and ships), which is what the fan base wants.
84  The Ur-Quan Masters Re-Release / General UQM Discussion / Re: My take on Stardock on: July 18, 2018, 05:21:29 am

CommanderShepard, calling for more negative reviews is hostile.
You clearly don't understand how it works, because no one would be making up a review, it's an authentic gamble based on the current standing of the fanbase.

I suggest that you avoid being condescending. Reread what I wrote above. I'll reproduce it here in full, with new emphasis:

I see nothing in the definition of a review bomb that says it has to be dishonest.

People who have opinions about the game itself from direct experience should honestly report those opinions to those who lack it. People who have opinions about Stardock in general may also give those opinions. Attempting to increase the rate of negative opinions being expressed would not be dishonest at the individual level, but it would be dishonest in aggregate, much as a focus group chosen with bias will present a biased view of general opinions even if each member of the group is honest. I think honesty is more important than spite.

On the other end of things, I see no reason for F&P to do this - they are not directly harmed by SC:O, and if it came out that they did, it would be very bad for them. This suggests that they aren't doing it. And calling their legal adversaries names does not count as inciting a review bomb.


TL;DR: we shouldn't organize bias in SC:O reviews. That's dumb and bad.

Attempting to organize people you think would produce honest, sincere negative reviews is entirely under this umbrella. And this was clearly what you were saying earlier, emphasis added:

If you want to boycott it more effectively, get players to leave negative reviews on all platforms it might be released on and on game blogs (which will require researching them) while mentioning how Star Control 2 / UQM was the best of the series in order to garner reputation to P&F.

You still don't understand what I suggested which is ironic given that you seemed to present it yourself, and that's not to be condescending, that's my assessment based on your repeated comments. I'm not in control over the outcome of people's conclusions, it's Star Control, not Mind Conrtol, I don't logically *know* they're going to be negative because it would be a statistical gamble, which, based on the fans, would have a good chance of succeeding.
If I were conducting such a campaign, I would only be in control over *asking* people for their feedback, but not whether or not the feedback is positive or negative, so there are no ethical problems with it. On it's own, all it would do is simply attract more attention to the dispute, but since Fred and Paul happen to look like the underdogs in this issue, it's more likely people will sympathize with them. Simply asking people for their feedback is not "minimally" acceptable, it's across the board accepted by everyone. Have you ever heard of Rotten Tomatoes or IGN? Seems like plenty of people are fine using those sites.
85  The Ur-Quan Masters Re-Release / General UQM Discussion / Re: My take on Stardock on: July 18, 2018, 12:31:39 am
It turns out it was a good idea to double check because it seems like Stardock is trying to claim ownership over the races themselves in order to enforce ownership over the SC title, so Stardock did lie twice now.

I still don't see that anyone would be issuing DOS attacks, that sounds like an intentionally hostile tone and is obviously illegal.

I do have some support for SCO itself, though with some reluctance. They do have 100 employees to pay, they have a growing fan base, they have a giant game with customizable features and they've made other cool games, they've been learning the value of listening to their players. However, I personally have tried their beta and don't want Stardock to control the *future* of the series and UQM since their writing is very inexperienced, that's something Fred and Paul should be involved with without question, so I haven't given up on them either.

CommanderShepard, calling for more negative reviews is hostile.
You clearly don't understand how it works, because no one would be making up a review, it's an authentic gamble based on the current standing of the fanbase. Doing anything that isn't 100% authentic is a bad idea and poses ethical dillemas, so your premise that there are any plans for any kind of review bomb is fallacious.

Someone wouldn't be explicitly telling people to leave a negative review, one would simply be asking objectively for people to compare the SCO writing to the SC2 writing, and if SC2 is actually as good as we think it is, then we can assume their conclusion will most often be that SC2 is a better story and therefore SCO is comparatively lower quality. But, it doesn't matter anyway because I don't think it would change as much at this point, I did some investigating and I see more opportunity for Fred and Paul to focus on the future or settling.
86  The Ur-Quan Masters Re-Release / General UQM Discussion / Re: My take on Stardock on: July 17, 2018, 10:44:16 am
So you talk about review bombing and it's not hostile.
I get defensive for the forum and want you to shut up because I don't want to the forum to become a target - "that's hostile".

I don't mind being the bad guy, i just want to point out the hypocrisy.

I just don't want the forum to turn into a 4chan-type where it basically becomes this base of operations for witchhunts, brigades, and group DDOS attacks.
I don't see that it would be, operations would eventually move to private conversations.

I mean... WTF mate?

How is that not hostile?

I don't know what your deal is exactly but I'm past this issue. I talked to Stardock a lot, I like them more after getting to know them, UQM will allegedly be untouched but that has yet to be fully confirmed.
87  The Ur-Quan Masters Re-Release / General UQM Discussion / Re: My take on Stardock on: July 17, 2018, 04:11:06 am
If it were only about the SC title
I just spoke with Stardock and they said it's only the SC trademark. I need to double check and make sure, but that's what I was directly told on discord.

Unfortunately, I've found that Stardock's representations about the suit tend to be misleading.  Take, for example, the link in my earlier post, which is a direct quote from Stardock's CEO and owner.  For that matter, if you go to the FAQ, there are links from there to all of the trademark registrations that Stardock has filed for; you can go read those for yourself.  If they're telling you it's just about the "Star Control" name, they're not being forthright with you.

It is possible, but I'll double check with others to make sure, I remember that Fred and Paul said Stardock was untruthful about waiting to receive their blessing in a blog post.
88  The Ur-Quan Masters Re-Release / General UQM Discussion / Re: My take on Stardock on: July 17, 2018, 03:42:05 am

If it were only about the SC title

I just spoke with Stardock and they said it's only the SC trademark. I need to double check and make sure, but that's what I was directly told on discord. So for now it looks like there's no major problems and we can forget about the whole thing.
89  The Ur-Quan Masters Re-Release / General UQM Discussion / Re: My take on Stardock on: July 17, 2018, 03:29:20 am
I'm more afraid for the future of the forum if it becomes actively hostile.
I don't see that anyone is making it hostile, these are all reasonable discussions.

My desire for CommanderShepard to simply STFU is a selfish one.
Never mind, you made it hostile for no good reason.

I actually have a very antagonist relationship with Brad and I'm surprised he hasn't booted me from the founders project.
I'm always bitching about something I think the game should or shouldn't be doing and I go to great lengths to make my voice as loud as possible in that context.
I've talked with Stardock and they seem open to people expressing different game options, so I don't see why you'd be booted unless you were hostile.

I just don't want the forum to turn into a 4chan-type where it basically becomes this base of operations for witchhunts, brigades, and group DDOS attacks.
I don't see that it would be, operations would eventually move to private conversations.

As for Serosis, every time I see you pop into this thread I think, why? If you don't like discussions of the legal situation, why can't you just ignore this thread?

I've gotten some useful information here, but more so from Stardock itself. UQM should be fine.

But no, we got CommanderShepard trying to organize "friendly" review bombs and finding ways to hurt another game because he's butt-hurt over a legal dispute that's not connected to him.
It seems like you're forgetting that I didn't make this dispute up, it's Fred and Paul that raised concerns, possibly warranted. I'm inclined to support them if UQM is attacked, but it seems Stardock is only interested in the SC title, not UQM, so these forums are free to retain the UQM title and make a UQM fan version. Given that Fred and Paul have access to UQM, I am wondering why they want to raise a dispute over the SC title, but it could be they don't want conflicting storylines as they've probably spent a lot of time thinking about them.

90  The Ur-Quan Masters Re-Release / General UQM Discussion / Re: Can I use a different coding platform under the UQM2 Name on: July 17, 2018, 01:23:38 am
Like if I were to start inserting SCO ships or aliens into the MegaMod, then Brad would have words to say to me.
But see, some of the SCO ships and races probably coincide with some of the UQM ships and races. Stardock supposedly claims they own the rights to everything UQM when they bought content at Atari's bankruptcy auction, and that affects any kind of UQM sequel.  

Safest way to go about it is if you have a UQM alien in your fan sequel, say, a Supox. Just slap the Creative Commons license in a text file and keep it with the game.
So again that seems to contradict what was stated earlier. You're saying by choosing to put *more* UQM races in will decrease the likelihood it infringes on the license?

If it has to do with UQM as it pertains to P&F, slap a GNU license on it. Simple.

Alright well I hope you're right. I'll see if others agree.
Pages: 1 ... 4 5 [6] 7 8


Login with username, password and session length

Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!