Author
|
Topic: Stardock Litigation Discussion (Read 130127 times)
|
|
|
lostsoul
Zebranky food
 Offline
Posts: 30
|
should the forum take down the "News: Paul Reiche and Fred Ford want to continue the story they started when they created Star Control II — The Ur-Quan Masters. «Happy days and jubilation!» «But wait!» «There is something wrong here... something which makes my sheath retract and my talons ooze.» «Please, Captain, we need your help!»" at the top of the page now that everything is squared away?
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
JHGuitarFreak
Enlightened
Offline
Posts: 1374
|
I'm personally a little bit disappointed that SC1 and SC3 have gone commercial again rather than open-source.
The source code for those two don't exist anymore, well, at least for SC1. Are we sure this information is current even after the massive archive searches P&F had to go through at the beginning of the case? Also, would it be legally a good idea to do a complete recreation of the game from scratch as was done with OpenRA, Open Imperium Galactica and Remnants of the Precursors if given P&F's blessing or would stardock approval also be required?
If P&F have it then I'm sure Serge & Co will be working with them to open source it.
Otherwise I believe the only legality someone would run in to recreating SC1 would be having to rename it.
Stardock only own the registered trademark and distribution rights, they don't have control over the content of it. Just like UQM.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
The artist once again known as Kohr-Ah Death 213. Get your MegaMod HERE |
|
|
astkr5
Zebranky food
Offline
Posts: 18
|
Yes, this outcome is definitely for the best. The current state of things leaves me with a very uncomfortable question: Would I buy the next Star Control game that Stardock has in the pipe? I genuinely have no idea. As an old fan who's painfully aware of the details of the lawsuit, I feel like my answer should be "no". As a profoundly selfish person and as a gamer who just wants his entertainment, my answer should be "yes". Knowing that Brad Wardell tried to trick the core team into handing over rights to UQM, that should be a hard "no" again. Also knowing that every person I've ever met is screwed up in some fashion and being a big believer in forgiveness, there's more reason for "yes". The lawsuit's resolution seems perfectly tailored to make this choice difficult, at least for me. A question for later.
That's also a good description of my thought process. I like space games, I'm also a big believer in forgiveness, and I don't particularly enjoy holding grudges. On the other hand, Wardell's bad behaviour both in regards to this lawsuit debacle and the UQM project (not to mention other incidents outside the scope of Star Control or this community) has been pretty longstanding and he's not really shown any contrition or even really acknowledgement that he did anything wrong that I've seen. And even though I think the notion of forgiving people even when they don't apologize is a noble one, I also don't like actively supporting people who act arrogantly, petulantly or unfairly when they show no regret for their actions (because it sets a bad standard).
So I think it's still going to be a no from me, but who knows. If nothing else, I'd consider at least buying a new game on Humble Bundle and sending the cash charity-wards.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
|
Krulle
Enlightened
Offline
Gender: 
Posts: 1115
*Hurghi*! Krulle is *spitting* again!
|
To the Yes/No question on future Stardock games:
It'll be a no from me, until the F&P game has been released without interference from Stardock.
The biggest risk I currently see with this agreement, is that Stardock can continue now, while F&P have to wait a few years.
In-between, there's little to prevent Stardock from blowing up these issues again...
So, I'll be waiting beyond that point before playing Stardock games.
But I have to confess, due to my current life-style, I don't have time to play anything else than casual games anyway.
So, likely my conscious "no" would not have changed a single sale number anyway....
I hope in 6-8 years it'llchange...
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
|
astkr5
Zebranky food
Offline
Posts: 18
|
The way I see it, Stardock is much more than just Brad Wardell. And by buying SCO you reward Stardock's creative efforts, not the lawsuit that's now concluded anyway.
That's a fair attitude, I'd agree that Stardock is more than just one person. On the other hand, last I knew it is Wardell's privately held company, so it's not quite like buying a game from a publicly held corporation with a CEO you might dislike but who is essentially just a very well paid employee of the organisation (and might very well be replaced in a few years anyway). There are concrete ways in which you are directly supporting Wardell the individual in buying Stardock games. If you take issue with EA CEO Andrew Wilson for any reason, buying EA games does not support him in the same way.
Obviously in the end, of all the things to take ethical stands on, space videogames are some of the least important. But for me, if I care about the games or the situation at all, I kind of have to factor this stuff into my decisionmaking.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Krulle
Enlightened
Offline
Gender:
Posts: 1115
*Hurghi*! Krulle is *spitting* again!
|
I don't mind the actual document not being released.
I am sure that whatever the published (or to be published) normal-language information of the content of the agreement has been counterread by the lawyers...
I'm not afraid of that. More of a lack of a clause ensuring a certain non-interference with a project in its starting phase.
Likely both sides even put a "let us look first into your project" into the contract...
Anyway, we'll see how it plays out, what are 7 years more after 26 years of waiting?
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
