The Ur-Quan Masters Home Page Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
October 22, 2019, 09:04:37 pm
Home Help Search Login Register
News: Paul & Fred have reached a settlement with Stardock!

+  The Ur-Quan Masters Discussion Forum
|-+  The Ur-Quan Masters Re-Release
| |-+  General UQM Discussion (Moderator: Death 999)
| | |-+  Stardock Litigation Discussion
« previous next »
Pages: 1 ... 17 18 [19] 20 21 ... 45 Print
Author Topic: Stardock Litigation Discussion  (Read 47743 times)
Frogboy
*Many bubbles*
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 231



View Profile
Re: Stardock Litigation Discussion
« Reply #270 on: August 26, 2018, 12:04:57 am »

In what way would spitballing ideas publicly possibly enable a settlement? You aren't negotiating with the public -- we have no say in the matter. If you have an offer, you can still bring it to the opposing side of the dispute. Speaking publicly serves no real purpose other than trying to do PR for your company, which is fine, but there isn't any relevance here to a legal conclusion.

I’m not talking about Stardock (or PF) posting proposals. I am talking about Stardock (or PF) being able to participate in any of the many, many discussions and opine on various ideas that are posted to speed up the process. If you think lawyers “spitball” proposals back and forth you would be mistaken.  It’s a slow, arduous process. If you look back at the start of all this, I suggested PF and I talk to each other. I think you might be surprised at how much the system works to prevent direct discussions.
I didn't say anything about how I thought the negotiation process between your lawyers worked. I only suggested that a restriction on your ability to discuss settlement matters with the public doesn't seem to have any bearing on whatever that negotiation process is and how it plays out. You're making a claim that "participating in the ... many discussions ... that are posted" will "speed up the process" -- if you're not participating in public discussions by offering actual proposals to the other side (as you sensibly deny intending), then I don't see how you would be doing anything but stirring the pot and doing PR. If you are having difficulty communicating with the other side, talking to us (the public) is not a substitute.

You missed the point entirely.  Paul and Fred watch these posts, including this very thread.  When someone posts something that's interesting that no one has thought of, neither side is allowed to comment on it which, in turn, could allow a party to directly read what the other is thinking rather than interfacing through lawyers. Is that clear now?

Let's be candid about PR.  This is a tiny, tiny forum.  This post has a total of about 6,000 views.  And it's huge compared to the Reddit sub which has less than 1000 viewers total.  To put that in perspective, the most recent (less than a week old) journal on SC UI on starcontrol.com has 10k views.  The Q&A thread on starcontrol.com has almost 700,000 views.  Hanging out here is not an exercise in PR.  I'm here because I care about this community. I've been a part of it for years.
Logged
CommanderShepard
*Many bubbles*
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 111



View Profile
Re: Stardock Litigation Discussion
« Reply #271 on: August 26, 2018, 12:22:22 am »

Hanging out here is not an exercise in PR.
Isn't it true that;

A: You personally corresponded with people to name in-game planets after them in exchange for pre-sales?

B: You explicitly stated on discord you could not guarantee UQM's safety despite that you have the legal capacity to authorize it in writing?

C: That Stardock's legal fees for this litigation are covered by insurance, whereas F&Ps are being paid for out of pocket?

D: Stardock has gotten pre-sales as a result of communication on these forums?

E: You claimed F&P are not original creators, both as a legal claim and in discord, despite that F&P have pages upon pages of original draft content on their blog and are still in contact with former employees of theirs who have not made statements to contradict F&P's status as creators?

F: That Stardock sold the original games containing F&P's copyrighted content on Steam prior to having the DMCA issued to them?

G: That on several occasions, Stardock beseeched F&P to collaborate on several projects centered around Stardock's games, including a project to include original F&P races within the Galactic Civilizations franchise?

H: That on Stardock's Steam forums, beta testers were asked explicitly if they have played the original SC-titled games containing F&P's content?

I: Starock issued that SC:O is a prequel to the original games?



It seems like Stardock is willing to do quite a lot for PR and Stardock can only stand to benefit from any amount of it.
« Last Edit: August 26, 2018, 12:30:41 am by CommanderShepard » Logged
Frogboy
*Many bubbles*
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 231



View Profile
Re: Stardock Litigation Discussion
« Reply #272 on: August 26, 2018, 12:31:04 am »

So right after I mention hanging out here is *not* an exercise in PR you want to try to do an online deposition?

So why are you here CS? Are you engaging in PR?  You're the new one here, after all.  If we're going to assign ulterior motives to anyone who wants to hang out online and talk to people, why not start with you?
Logged
CommanderShepard
*Many bubbles*
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 111



View Profile
Re: Stardock Litigation Discussion
« Reply #273 on: August 26, 2018, 12:34:47 am »

So right after I mention hanging out here is *not* an exercise in PR you want to try to do an online deposition?

So why are you here CS? Are you engaging in PR?  You're the new one here, after all.  If we're going to assign ulterior motives to anyone who wants to hang out online and talk to people, why not start with you?

So after dodging the point I brought up that you can in fact still settle with F&P, you are now dodging all of the 9 questions I asked despite that you are the CEO who has publicly proclaimed they are engaged in a litigation with Fred & Paul and has made public statements questioning their integrity and character? That's also beside the fact that multiple people besides myself agree that it's possible you have ulterior motives centered around PR.
Logged
Frogboy
*Many bubbles*
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 231



View Profile
Re: Stardock Litigation Discussion
« Reply #274 on: August 26, 2018, 12:39:21 am »

So right after I mention hanging out here is *not* an exercise in PR you want to try to do an online deposition?

So why are you here CS? Are you engaging in PR?  You're the new one here, after all.  If we're going to assign ulterior motives to anyone who wants to hang out online and talk to people, why not start with you?

So after dodging the point I brought up that you can in fact still settle with F&P, you are now dodging all of the 9 questions I asked despite that you are the CEO who has publicly proclaimed they are engaged in a litigation with Fred & Paul and has made public statements questioning their integrity and character? That's also beside the fact that multiple people besides myself agree that it's possible you have ulterior motives centered around PR.

Your entitlement is noted.
Logged
CommanderShepard
*Many bubbles*
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 111



View Profile
Re: Stardock Litigation Discussion
« Reply #275 on: August 26, 2018, 01:05:25 am »

Your entitlement is noted.

And yet again, instead of answering the questions honestly, you try and attack the person who is asking the questions with some strawman about entitlement in order to get out of answering them. This only makes you look even worse than before. You've already demonstrated you're committed to discussing the issue with your numerous posts, so deflecting from these specific questions despite the proof of your continuous committed time on the issue only points strongly to the answers to those questions showing an ulterior motive.
« Last Edit: August 26, 2018, 01:07:55 am by CommanderShepard » Logged
Frogboy
*Many bubbles*
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 231



View Profile
Re: Stardock Litigation Discussion
« Reply #276 on: August 26, 2018, 01:12:50 am »

You seem to be missing the point.  Why should I answer your questions in the first place, anonymous internet person?
Logged
CommanderShepard
*Many bubbles*
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 111



View Profile
Re: Stardock Litigation Discussion
« Reply #277 on: August 26, 2018, 01:17:50 am »

You seem to be missing the point.  Why should I answer your questions in the first place, anonymous internet person?

If you're committed to this site and the litigation as you claim, then why *shouldn't* you answer the questions? You weren't obligated to respond to Elestan, nor rose, nor Laks, nor arilou nor anyone else here. I don't see that anyone is saying you're obligated to answer anything here, but that doesn't mean your refusal to answer something here has no consequences.
Logged
Frogboy
*Many bubbles*
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 231



View Profile
Re: Stardock Litigation Discussion
« Reply #278 on: August 26, 2018, 01:21:24 am »

I've said I care about this community. 

I don't know you. You just joined here.   I may get annoyed with Elestan but at least he's actually been part of this community for years.  I get angry with him but I respect him so I am more likely to answer him than some guy who just showed up to stir up trouble.

As for the litigation, it has nothing to do with you.  You're just random internet guy who thinks he's entitled to answers. You're not.   I'm here at my pleasure and will talk about whatever I'd like within the rules of the community.
Logged
CommanderShepard
*Many bubbles*
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 111



View Profile
Re: Stardock Litigation Discussion
« Reply #279 on: August 26, 2018, 01:23:50 am »

I've said I care about this community.  

I don't know you. You just joined here.   I may get annoyed with Elestan but at least he's actually been part of this community for years.  I get angry with him but I respect him so I am more likely to answer him than some guy who just showed up to stir up trouble.

As for the litigation, it has nothing to do with you.  You're just random internet guy who thinks he's entitled to answers. You're not.   I'm here at my pleasure and will talk about whatever I'd like within the rules of the community.

You've spent all this time coming up with excuses not to answer the questions, yet in that time, you could have answered the questions to your very own benefit if their premises were all false, and you've already demonstrated you're willing to commit time to PR.

Whether or not you know me doesn't have any bearing on whether the answers to those questions are "true".  So if you have no ulterior motive, then you and the public could only benefit to see evidence of such from the answers to those questions.

You had no problem spending days and days conversing with me, telling me F&P weren't original creators, saying they issued some PR campaign against you, that they wanted your trademark, that Stardock is purely the victim, etc, yet on these very specific questions, you insist on dodging them. I wasn't particularly sure of the answers to all of them, but because you've put so much effort into dodging them on a basis that contradicts your previous correspondence, I can now be more sure that the answers wouldn't benefit you.
« Last Edit: August 26, 2018, 01:40:41 am by CommanderShepard » Logged
Frogboy
*Many bubbles*
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 231



View Profile
Re: Stardock Litigation Discussion
« Reply #280 on: August 26, 2018, 01:39:53 am »

There’s a Q&A thread on starcontrol.com. You can always ask there or see if your questions haven’t already been asked dozens of times and answered dozens of times.
Logged
CommanderShepard
*Many bubbles*
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 111



View Profile
Re: Stardock Litigation Discussion
« Reply #281 on: August 26, 2018, 01:42:30 am »

There’s a Q&A thread on starcontrol.com. You can always ask there or see if your questions haven’t already been asked dozens of times and answered dozens of times.

If you're already committed to these forums as you claimed, then you would accept answering them here would benefit the community here, the people of this community who view these forums on a regular basis and who have indicated an interest in the truth on the matter.
« Last Edit: August 26, 2018, 02:04:34 am by CommanderShepard » Logged
Death 999
Global Moderator
Enlightened
*****
Offline Offline

Gender: Male
Posts: 3830


We did. You did. Yes we can. No.


View Profile
Re: Stardock Litigation Discussion
« Reply #282 on: August 26, 2018, 06:29:13 am »

Okay, how about we time out on this whole topic for, like, a week?
Logged
misterjei
Zebranky food
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1



View Profile
Re: Stardock Litigation Discussion
« Reply #283 on: September 04, 2018, 03:43:33 am »

I'm a long time lurker and I've loved Star Control since I first got my hands on it as a kid in the 90s. The state of this litigation is so incredibly depressing.

I've long been a fan of Stardock, so when I learned about SC:O, I was ecstatic. I became a founder the same day. When I heard about the litigation, I was heart-broken. However much blame there is to go around - I'm sure there's plenty - I hope Stardock realizes the huge cost they have incurred in goodwill. I've purchased many Stardock games in the past, but now? I don't know if I could bring myself to buy another. It's an incredibly bitter pill to swallow. Maybe if Stardock reaches a settlement under terms that aren't arm-twisting P&F... I hope so.

Stardock folks, I hope you won't dismiss my point of view because I'm a "random Internet person". (I mean, I did just register to be able to post this after reading these forums for quite a long time.) There are a lot of folks out there in the same position as me. We don't all post in the forums. But we read, and we listen... I hope you'll consider how much damage is being done to your brand by this whole awful mess.

Back to my lurker hole now. Wink
Logged
Elestan
*Smell* controller
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 420



View Profile
DMCA notices, request for restraining order filed
« Reply #284 on: September 08, 2018, 07:27:12 pm »

New court filings yesterday shed some light on the temporary disappearance of Stardock's properties from Steam last month.  It was indeed due to a DMCA notice from P&F, which was then counter-noticed.  Stardock is now requesting a temporary restraining order against P&F to prevent them from filing further DMCAs.  The wiki page had been updated with the new filings.
Logged
Pages: 1 ... 17 18 [19] 20 21 ... 45 Print 
« previous next »
Jump to:  


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!