Author
|
Topic: My take on Stardock (Read 197053 times)
|
Krulle
Enlightened
 Offline
Gender: 
Posts: 1115
*Hurghi*! Krulle is *spitting* again!
|
The new trademark applications have not yet been approved by the USPTO...
Anybody can file a comment regarding their view and arguments, especially if against granting a trademark which seems to trademark stuff which is already known, and thus coulld transfer the goodwill of someone else's product and work to the filer of a trademark.....
And yes, single words can be trademarked, see the trademark "Apple"... Which is currently considered to be the most valuable trademark worldwide.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
Death 999
Global Moderator
Enlightened
Offline
Gender:
Posts: 3874
We did. You did. Yes we can. No.
|
Article 1(A) Would give P&F free reign to completely destroy what SC:Origins was meant to be. In turn destroying any semblance of a decent game, making it moot for Stardock to have even bought the rights to Star Control.
What? Let's get this out here: Here is the entire Article 1(A):
Reiche shall not object to, interfere with, or challenge in any way, Stardock's development, publication, and/or distribution of Stardock Origins…
… I'll cut in here to note that 'Stardock Origins' was defined on page 1 as the game Stardock is working on, entitled "Star Control: Origins"
… provided that Reiche's Work and Reiche's Retained Rights are not used in any way, at any time or in any manner with respect to or in association with such development, publication, or distribution, without prior notice to and the express written approval of Reiche. Provided further, however, nothing herein shall be deemed to restrict or expand any otherwise legal use of Reiche's Work or Reiche's Retained Rights (e.g. fair use, individual and personal non-commercial use, etc.) by anyone.
Did you think that they were trying to force them to change the name? They weren't.
|
|
|
|
« Last Edit: March 25, 2018, 02:01:53 pm by Death 999 »
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
Frogboy
*Many bubbles*
Offline
Posts: 231
|
They have previously demanded internal builds to inspect them.
They demanded we take our Super Melee.
They demanded we take out the ship designer.
They demanded we change the Earthling ship.
I’d call that interference.
Saying they won’t interfere...as long as we do as they say is not very useful.
That aside, it’s irrelevant. Any settlement will have to absolutely protect Stardock’s IP rights and investments and address the damage they’ve done.
We just want to bring a new Star Control game out. We’ve worked 4 years on it and it’s coming together great. Paul and Fred were offered the IP at cost and declined.
We want to see their story continue. But given the insanity of the past few months, that is only going to happen through mutual agreement.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
|
Frogboy
*Many bubbles*
Offline
Posts: 231
|
See my above post.
Any settlement must ensure that the nonsense of the last few months will never happen again and recognizes the damage they’ve caused. The courts will be a lot less gentle with them. There will be no settlement offers from us.
Like I have said, I just wanted to make a new Star acontrol game. And over the past few months I’ve instead been subjected to an endless stream of abuse backed by poorly rationalized explanations for why I deserve to be insulted, threatened, ridiculed, etc. so yes, at this point, we have zero interest in any settlement. They’ve lost a fan.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Zelnik
Zebranky food
Offline
Posts: 16
|
See... Frogboy, you have lied an awful lot. Why would be believe you when Fred and Paul haven't lied to us?
Seriously, why even come here? Are you trying to win us over? Your company is -suing- the creators of this game.
At BEST you will have some people disinterested, but in general, we will not accept your words and trust you on, essentially, anything. You could tell me the color of an orange and I would suspect you painted a lemon.
Ultimately, you have shot yourself in the foot because you are trying to block their right to create their next game. No one will support you after doing that.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
|
Elestan
*Smell* controller
Offline
Posts: 431
|
Just like Elestan picks apart Stardocks legal documents I'm sure as hell going to pick apart P&F's.
Sounds great; the more the merrier!
Okay, there are probably diminishing returns there, but I welcome having someone challenge me on my analysis. Frogboy has occasionally said that I'm getting things wrong, but he's never specific enough for me to do anything about it.
I don't see those demands in their settlement proposal. No shit, that is what they wanted out of Origins before their settlement offer. But Agreement I(A) would give them legal grounds to enforce it.
I don't see that. I(a) is a limitation on Reiche, not a grant of authority. I do think that it is less of a limitation on Reiche than Stardock needs for its assurances, because the definition of "Reiche's Work" includes terms that are too subjective.
As a side observation, for a guy who throws around "I Am Not A Layer" constantly you sure try to act like one.
While I'm not a lawyer, I have worked with lawyers on a variety of documents, and I've been reading court filings and opinions for a couple of decades. I'll confess the conceit that I think I'm a little better at it than the average Redditor. What would the alternative be? The two parties' legal briefs (and now the settlement proposals) are the most reliable sources of information on what's really going on with the case. If we want to know what's going on, someone has to read them, and I don't see a real lawyer stepping forward.
I'd rather not have to use the disclaimer, but I could get in legal trouble if I give the impression of actually being a lawyer when I'm not.
It's actually amusing how involved with it you are. If you're up for it I suggest getting a legal degree and pass the Bar.
I'll take that as a compliment, but I just happen to have some spare time at the moment - enough to read some briefs and post about them, but not enough to go to law school. Besides, I prefer reading computer code; it's a lot like legal code, but even more rigorously defined.
|
|
|
|
« Last Edit: March 25, 2018, 10:02:54 pm by Elestan »
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
|
Krulle
Enlightened
Offline
Gender:
Posts: 1115
*Hurghi*! Krulle is *spitting* again!
|
I don't see that. I(a) is a limitation on Reiche, not a grant of authority. I do think that it is less of a limitation on Reiche than Stardock needs for its assuarances, because the definition of "Reiche's Work" includes terms that are too subjective. Because that is still based on Human language, which does require interpretation.
On top of that, "Reiche's Work" is not defined in all its borders, and after all this time likely only a judge can decide where the border is.
Besides, I prefer reading computer code; it's a lot like legal code, but even more rigorously defined.
It is also a lot less prone to misinterpretation.
And if there is room for misinterpretation, the parser/compiler usually tells you so, and even in which line....
And if a misinterpretation does happen, there's usually a reason like a misspelling, or simply a faulty formula,...
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
