As for the substance of Brad's arguments, yeah, we've already discussed that. I also don't think that F&P claim that they own the concept of hyperspace or the color red, but rather that they own an expression of hyperspace that consists of space permeated by red light that is full of dancing lights and holes in space leading to star systems (and traveling ships). Whether that already constitutes copyrightable expression or that expression should be much more specific (like the shape and the content of the holes, the shape and the size of the lights, which are different between SC2 and SCO), I'm not qualified to answer.

For those interested:
This is the document on courtlistener, signed by Stardock/Valve's counsel and by F&P's counsel.
They also request an extension on the current limit dates regarding amended complaints, and discoveries by about 1 week, for all parties, from 24 or 29 May 2019 to 3 June 2019.

Since all parties signed the request, chances are that the judge will order as proposed.

It's rather unlikely the terms of the agreement will be public, and I must confess I'd love to read them.
Some of them will become public, either by public withdrawal of the TM-requests of Stardock, or withdrawal of the oppositions on those, merely by observance of the public file inspections of the court, USPTO, and other institutions.
Or by the continuation of the GotP project (or the announcement of a new name for the product).

Personally, I would not be surprised if this pending deadline was part of the impetus for this round of settlement talks. Federal jurists love awarding pyrrhic victories - they're harder to appeal - and by dismissing counts 12 and 13 without prejudice, the Court may have actually made more trouble for Stardock. Per the Court's instructions, in order to move forward, Stardock would have to rewrite those allegations to focus on R/F's tortious disruption of Stardock's contractual relationships with a specific, limited group of customers who pre-ordered SCO and whose identities can be readily ascertained. But, after the embarrassing "backlash" quotes from Frogboy's affidavit, it should be clear to NP that Stardock's collected "exhibits" are worthless. NP would be hard-pressed to draft a Fourth Amended Complaint which doesn't have evidentiary problems (assuming Stardock does not want jurors to hear from disgruntled ex-Founders) and open up Stardock to damaging, albeit limited discovery (why was Stardock issuing refunds, anyway?).

They just asked for (and received) the same extension to Stardock's 4th AC deadline, as well as GOG's pleading response.  Looks like we'll have some news by June 3rd, one way or another.

Ugh, I kind of expected that to happen. I wonder what makes the parties want to stall things like that.

Also, if Stardock does file its 4th amended complaint, wouldn't that mean that the settlement negotiations have failed, at least for the time being?
Although, that may be exactly the reason for extending the deadline. If the settlement talks succeed, there would be no need to file an amended complaint.

Or, as the stipulation suggests, the parties actually need to file their amended pleadings before settlement negotiations can continue.

Oh well, if they are going to settle after all, then a few more days of waiting would be more than worth it. After all, we all want things to be done right. And the settlement talks having been resumed and apparently being quite successful is the best news we've had in a long while.

A document filed at the Trademark Appeals Board today indicates that the parties have reached a settlement.  Terms are not yet known, other than that P&F are no longer opposing the "Star Control" mark.

Yep.  I'll admit that there's a part of me that will be a bit disappointed if we never see a Judge rule on some of the topics we've discussed here over the last couple of years...it would be nice to see where we got it right and wrong.  But I'd rather see P&F get back to making GotP.