/v/ - Video Games

Immediately suspicious. Brad Wardell is hated by SJW faggots. This smells all kinds of funny.

>>13900523

I guess it's just that the sort of people who tend to have the drive to rule over others that would make them strive to be a CEO would tend to be psychopaths.

>>13900523

Stardock isn't even that big, and Brad is usually a Bro, so I don't get any of this.

>>13900782

Hang all the lawyers and this can never happen.

>>13900736

>If I don't get to see the Spathi ever again then i'm freaking rioting.

<I'm sure we'll never speak again.

t. Spathi high council, after shielding their own planet

It was obvious Brad was going to pull this years ago. Why buy just the name and rights to the dumpster fire that was SCIII if not to try and wrestle it into control over the series?

What? This was literally the only good game I was looking forward to. Why must this always fucking happen?

>>13901314

It's always the Jews lawyers.

>>13901089

Oh man I just know what sort of bomb he's going to drop. Wardell doesn't take shit.

>>13900782

>>13900817

>>13901319

From my experience, when your hired firm is in automatic defense mode of an IP or patent, they just go to town with whatever they can get away with without consultation. It's a way for them to earn their keep or to let corporate know that yes they're doing something even when there's a downtime. I'm betting this was also the case with CDPR suing an old lady for having the same IP as someone who pirated Witcher 2.

t. IT guy for a law firm

PS. Every lawyer high enough in the chain of command I've spoken to is a goddamn unfeeling psychopath. Governments should fucking put these people on surveillance as I'm sure as shit they're hiding something gruesome somewhere.

Well Stardock posted their side of the story, and it still doesn't make muck sense

https://forums.starcontrol.com/486284

>>13904018

Maybe it's this.

>>13909499

>The short version is that the classic IP is messy. We understand that this makes them "really really angry" but we weren't a party to that agreement. All we can do is try to put something together that releases them from the restrictions placed on their IP that they agreed to and transfer any and all rights and responsibilities to them. We want them to make Ghosts but we don't want any liability or association with it.

Maybe I'm dumb but this sounds fair to me. Original team gets their rights back legally and can make their game and so can these new quacks. Am I missing something here?

>>13903746

No, he is shit.

You know what's actually shit? Every game with stardock's name on it.

>>13909612

The original Galactic Civilizations and Fallen Enchantress are alright.

>>13909666

Nice try satan but SD is only a publisher

>>13909666

Sins of a Solar Empire is kind of like a TES game. It's a really nice platform for modders, and there are some really nice total conversion mods for it. I'm partial to the Halo mod, but there are some good Star Wars mods too. There's a Star Trek mod too, but I never played it because I'm not really into Star Trek.

Any update on this?

>>13909895

It doesn't make any sense. I think someone's legs are broken.

>>13900500

>>13901089

>inb4 this is all a joke and they hire the stardock team

>>13910071

You remind me of the people who still Kojima being fired was a ruse.

Seems like this could shit up both games considering that gray area of whether Atari even had the rights at the point of the auction.

>>13900523

We've been waiting for 25 years =/= we've been working for 25 years. They were too busy for the past 25 years making Skylanders and shit.

This situation also reeks, and mostly Paul and Fred's side if you ask me. Stardock has over the past years stated more than once what they reiterate in the link in >>13909499 so I'd like to see some proof of them trying to use the classic aliens or stop them from making their game.

And it doesn't matter what their opinion is about Atari's rights to the game at the time they sold it, the contract they signed is what matters. And knowing Atari, it most likely means Paul and Fred don't have a leg to stand on and Stardock could sell SCII-branded toiletpaper if they felt so inclined.

>>13909684

>Sins of a Solar Empire is kind of like a TES game.

Except the vanilla game is damn fucking good. At least with all the expansions up to Rebellion.

>>13909499

>First, as many people know, the classic Star Control games have been available for sale long before Stardock acquired the rights from Atari four years ago.

That's irrelevant to the assertion that the rights they have don't permit sale. And he just dances around that. It doesn't matter how long they've been sold without permission or how much money they give back, so why even say that?

>This is one of the reasons why we have been so excited about Paul and Fred's project. Their game frees us to introduce new characters and a new story into the new Star Control

This is pure horseshit. A business would never be excited about being cucked out of the core value of the franchise and forced to pull another SCIII. And they certainly weren't 'freed' by this since they'd already been forced to make their own characters and story prior to the announcement.

>All we can do is try to put something together that releases them from the restrictions placed on their IP that they agreed to and transfer any and all rights and responsibilities to them.

In other words, Paul and Fred are right and Stardock is preventing them from making their game as they're still arguing about some sort of contract that Stardock insists permits it.

>>13911527

Bullshit. It’s reasonable to ask why they didn’t stop the game sales 10 years ago if this was a problem?

Stardock has an exclusive license to the aliens. They could have used the. If they wanted but chose not to. This has been talked about plenty before.

You can’t have it both ways. Stardock either has the power to prevent their game in which case just sign a damn form releasing that limitation or they don’t have the power in which case why are they bitching in public?

>>13909666

best strategy game ever imho

Now that the skylanders toys are drying up, and stardock put marketing towards sparking interest in a new star control, they want to be cunts about it?

You can’t sell your rights then get mad you sold your rights.

>>13919063

Stardock is the legit license holders because they bought it off Atari. Stardock just wants the two chucklefucks who have been sitting on their asses for the better part of more than two decades to get a fucking lawyer and write up an agreement that their project is in no way connected to Stardock's. The fact that they haven't sent them a cease and desist yet is just evidence of Stardock's goodwill in all of this. They can legally do so anytime they want and there's nothing those two idiots can do about it.

>>13919761

When did Atari acquire it? Did they buy it at Acclaim's fire sale?

Brad is trying to Jew Paul and Fred. He's representing their game to media as part of his expanded "Star Control" universe and simultaneously trying to force them into into an agreement where they'd be tied to Stardock if they want to continue with their game. Paul and Fred want nothing to do with them and want to go their own way. Brad knows that means his game is going to end up like "The Bureau: XCOM Declassified" since his shitty company is going to be competing with people who turn everything they touch to platinum and is trying to keep Star Control from just walking out the door.

>>13919761

Stardock doesn't own the aliens and story, and both parties agree on this. They only own the name. They have nothing.

>>13919919

PF own the IP and it is exclusively licensed to the publisher, in this case Stardock.

And why the fuck are PF coming out of the woodwork now? To ride on Stardock’s coat tails now that they’ve put in the effort to bring Star Control back.

>>13919996

>And why the fuck are PF coming out of the woodwork now?

Hello newfriend, 40 year old here to answer your questions about the time before you were alive. Paul and Fred have tried multiple times to get a publisher for a Star Control IV throughout the years and failed. The last time they tried pitching it, they got roped into doing Skylanders instead. As is usual with Paul and Fred, they turned it a massive success and have been busy for quite a while with that. They said they'd come back to it after Skylanders, and here we are.

>To ride on Stardock’s coat tails

It's adorable you think the guys who created SCII and Skylanders need to ride on a developer's coat-tails known for galciv2, gamergate, and rent-seeking.

>>13920031

So why the fuck are they making these bitchy posts? Why wait until now?

You think it’s coincidence they wait until a new Star Control game goes into beta for them to make their announcement of a new game and then make little ankle biting posts?

They haven’t even made a god damn website for their game.

Instead of bitching they should make their game. Duh.

>>13919996

Why are you sucking Stardocks dick so much anon? They are being kikes, stop defending them.

>>13920110

>So why the fuck are they making these bitchy posts?

Because Stardock's lawyers got in touch with them and are trying to force them into an agreement if they want to continue making their game. They're also apparently illegally selling their old games. You'd be pretty bitchy about this, too.

>They haven’t even made a god damn website for their game.

That's not the way Paul and Fred work. They vanished during SCII's development (we thought it was likely canceled) and then just reappeared one day with a finished game.

>>13920178

And your evidence for this is…?

>>13920211

The creators own words. It's a known fact that they have wanted to make a new SC game for years. You would have to be idiotic to think they are only doing it now to fuck over Stardock for some reason.

>>13920224

Not to fuck over Stardock, to ride on the free publcity that the new game is getting.

And like it or not, they can’t make a new SC game. Stardock owns SC.

They can make their own game but can’t call it SC. Maybe they should have bought the rights to SC if it mattered so much to them.

>>13920178

The public statements of Brad, Paul, and Fred. Here, I'll spoonfeed you like the faggot you are:

https://forums.starcontrol.com/486284/page/1

https://dogarandkazon.squarespace.com/

- They all agree Paul and Fred own SCII's story elements.

- They all agree Brad owns the trademark "Star Control".

- Brad's angry that Paul and Fred call their new game a direct sequel to their old game, saying it builds on "good will and brand awareness". Paul and Fred created that good will and brand awareness, but Brad believes he has purchased them.

- While Brad complains about this 'association' with his Star Control requiring entering into an agreement with Stardock, Brad is simultaneously representing Paul and Fred as associated with his 'Star Control' against Paul and Fred's wishes to the media and constantly pressures to "work together for mutual benefit".

- Paul and Fred claim stardock's lawyers are restricting them from making their game without entering into an agreement. Brad claims he is not restricting them, but he also claims that they must be released from their restrictions, by entering into an agreement.

It should be clear what game's being played here.

>>13920262

>Free publicity

The game isn't getting very much publicity anon. The average video gets pretty low views. If anything it would be bad to release the game now with competition but considering the fanbase is small but dedicated they would likely buy both no problem.

>>13920262

>>13920290

>SC owns SC

They own star control 3. They don't own any of the alien races or lore.

>>13920295

Do you know what a trademark even is? Try calling your new game the sequel to Grand Theft Auto and watch how fast the hellfire falls.

>>13920303

>Hey guise we promise of the original guys want to make a star control game we will let them

>Kek we lied we have lawyers on our side

Why are you defending kikes?

>>13920282

It’s clear what’s being played here. You’re just too stupid to see that it’s you.

>>13920316

Back to reddit, kike.

>>13920327

I will right after I get done paying your mom the 5 bucks for sucking me off.

>>13920343

You surely showed him

>>13915363

>>13919996

>>13920110

>>13920316

Basically one group owns Star Control II from buying a previous contract but they do not own the rest of the franchise and therefore do not actually have full control of the IP. What is happening here is that one group's lawyers is trying to use this game as a focal point to wrestle total control of the franchise away from the other party by forcing them to sign an agreement on their terms. This process is long and draining of resources of the weaker party (resources that would've been used productively for something else). As for why Stardock is waiting for it now, they're not waiting this dispute has been going on atleast a few years ago.

Finally Paul and Fred saying that they must release themselves of that restriction by signing an agreement is the legalese way of saying yes, the reason they aren't outright saying yes is deflection and hoping you won't try to read between the lines. Also a common tactic.

The Saga continues:

https://dogarandkazon.squarespace.com/blog/2017/12/4/star-control-i-ii-and-iii-arent-for-sale-on-gogcom-any-more-how-come

>DECEMBER 04, 2017

>We've decided to stop selling our old games, because:

>We think it's necessary to 'clear the decks' to help resolve our definitely-not-harmonious, until-recently-private, months-long conflict with Brad Wardell and his lawyers at Stardock.

The Ur-Quan Masters HD Project is a free, vastly superior experience. Did we mention it's free? Fans have been dedicated to improving UQM for 15 years and it is awesome! Hopefully Star Control I and III will also become available for free in the near future.

>Why was it okay to sell the games on GoG, but not on Steam or elsewhere?

>The simple answer is because we have had our own direct distribution agreement with GOG since 2011 and no agreement with Stardock or Steam or anyone else. If you're into details, here goes:

>In April 2011, we learned that Star Control I, II and III had been re-published on Good Old Games (GOG) — a big surprise since the games hadn’t been sold for years and no one had contacted us for permission to do so.

We reached out to GOG who said our games had been offered to them by Atari as part of a large batch of older Atari products. We then contacted Atari to let them know that we were the original authors and owners of the copyright to the games and that we had not given permission for them to republish our work. Atari checked with its lawyers and wrote back confirming our claims, apologizing to everyone for the mistake and informing GOG to remove the games from sale and pay any royalties earned to us.

>Instead we suggested a way that GOG could continue to sell our games. GOG signed separate, independent contracts with: Atari to license the Star Control trademark, and us to license the rights to the games themselves. GOG has been selling the games and paying us directly ever since.

>In October of this year, history repeated itself when Stardock began selling our games on Steam and elsewhere (even bundled with theirs), again without getting our permission. This time we couldn't come to an agreement, so we asked that Stardock stop bundling and selling the games. They refused, so we've decided to end our 2011 distribution agreement with GOG as a first step to having the games pulled down.

>>13921943

Holy fuck just reach a fucking deal already, you have a small niche audience who wants these games to be made and will surely buy both since they're dime a dozen on this fucking industry.

Instead we might not even one if this fucking drama keeps on.

Christ, they're fucking over not only each other but themselves over this shit.

>>13900523

The people that rise to the top are the most corrupt people imaginable. They force out those that are there for the love of the game, that are there because it is their passion and the industry has nearly died because of it until digital distribution changed that by showing that these creative people were right.

>>13900529

>>13900546

>implying no cucks haven't 180ed on that

>implying people can't be smart enough to lie

>implying people don't just change to fit social norms around them

>implying being hated by SJWs makes you somehow not a piece of shit

wew lads a lot of implications in your posts. Fact of the matter is the dude has bragged about how many females they have on staff through diversity hires. Galactic Civilization wasn't exactly received well and despite being on the humble bundle monthly still has less owners than 2.

>>13915525

He did (it was either ralph retort or Reddit to link to.)

http://please use archive.is/intolerant-antis-turn-on-brianna-wu-over-brad-wardell-truce-0303015/

>>13920282

>Stardock brags about female employee levels

>Brad takes Wu out to coffee

>Galactic Civilization sells for shit, gets put on Humble Bundle Monthly to boost owner numbers

>no one has faith in their company anymore

Pretty obvious what's going on. A lot of Stardock shills out en mass today.

>>13922011

Fuck off Brad, they are under no obligation to reach a deal because Stardock is abusing the legal system.

>>13922240

Its sad that Stardock is putting more effort here trying to seem like /ourguys/ than into making their games good.

>>13922011

Brad's attempting to force them into an (((agreement))) as he claims the announcement of a direct sequel to Paul and Fred's IP (they all agree the story/aliens belong to Paul and Fred) necessarily makes use of the "goodwill and brand recognition" (his own words) that Brad believes he purchased. Brad attempting to prevent them from making their game unless they agree to collaborate with Stardock was the last straw and Paul and Fred are going to slap his grabby hands starting with him trying to appear as if he owns the copyright to the old games. That puts his kikery in check - if he pushes this 'you owe us for use of the goodwill you created' bullshit to try to steal their game, Paul and Fred can fire back with copyright violation.

>>13923836

>wait, i though stardock were cool about them making their own videogame?

They were merely pretending. Brad wants it under his 'Star Control' umbrella and has apparently been applying pressure for months.

As long as galciv III is still a worse game than II DA I'm open to new games attempting to dethrone it in my mind.

Why are IPs such a big deal? Can't they just make a game with the same gameplay but have a different story and characters?

>>13923974

Brand recognition.

>>13923974

>Can't they just make a game with the same gameplay but have a different story and characters?

MUH LORE!

>>13900817

Fuck off /pol/. /v/ isn't a nazi safe space.

>>13924162

>the left is pro-lawyer

dohoho, no, everyone wants to hang you guys.

>>13923912

They already have if you've noticed their latest games.

>>13923836

That may have been Theater for rubes. Here is how I am understanding things.

>Brad Wardell buys rights to Star Control. Claims he's trying to hire the Toys for Bob guys to make a new game.

>Later says they won't be working on the game, but advising. Claims that the new game won't use Star Control races and is set in a different universe.

>Announces on the Star Control website that the reason they aren't using ST2 races is because the Toys for Bob guys are making their own game, Ghost of the Precursors, and that Stardock is cool with it.

>Ghost of the Precursors is announced and says nothing about about Star Dock. It's a sequel to Star Control 2, uses star control 2 races, and continues the story.

>Later, they update their website saying they are PISSED with stardock. (1) Stardock is selling the starcontrol games on steam, and bundling them with stardock games. Toys for Bob thinks that Atari lost the right to the games long before they sold the IP, and the games shouldn't be sold without their permission. (2) They are also pissed about the 'multiverse' thing and claim their is no connection between Stardock's "Star control Origins" and Star Control 2. (3) Also claim that Stardock is keeping them making their game.

>Stardock fires back: Claims they aren't doing anything to prevent Ghost of the Precursors, and are encouraging it. Claims they purchased the rights to publish the old games, and give the royalties to Toys for bob. Claims that they were always going to use new aliens. Also claimed it was stupid for them to use Starcontrol 2 aliens anyway since they are so old, and they were always going to start from scratch. Say they are just fine with Toys for Bob making making their own game, but Stardock wants nothing to do with the 'liability and association with it'

>Sounds okay on paper, but it's all very lawyered. Basically Brad Wardell is saying that Toys for Bob can't mention Star Control 2, or say that Ghost of the Precursors is the sequel to starcontrol 2 in anyway. That Stardock owns all rights to the name, and Toys for bob can't use it in their 'marketing'. And if they want to call their game a sequel to 'Star Control' they have to make a deal. They have the rights to the aliens, can use the same story, but cant mention star control

>Toys for bob makes a second post, saying they will end their agreement for GOG to Star Control 1 & 2 to get it pulled from GOG. Claims part of their beef was with Stardock not getting permission to sell the games on steam. Wants to pull the games from GOG to get more leverage on Stardock.

>Stardock: Oh hey, we didn't realize the GOG thing was set up through toys for bob, and not us. Don't worry, we now have it set up through us, and we control both steam and GOG sales. Don't worry, we are still giving the royalties to toys for bob, but it's our stuff.

It's all a fucking complicated mess. Seems to be toys for bob aren't interested in money, as much as permission, and wardell thinks it's okay to make their own game, but says mentioning it is related to star control somehow associates it with IP he owns, and that's bad.

>>13911527

I'm trying to figure out if you're a retard , fan boying, or Fred.

>>First, as many people know, the classic Star Control games have been available for sale long before Stardock acquired the rights from Atari four years ago.

<That's irrelevant to the assertion that the rights they have don't permit sale.

It's relevant. While it doesn't clear Stardocks name, i would want to know why Paul and Fred are just now throwing a hissy fit, when they've had years to do it.

>>This is one of the reasons why we have been so excited about Paul and Fred's project. Their game frees us to introduce new characters and a new story into the new Star Control

<This is pure horseshit. A business would never be excited about being cucked out of the core value of the franchise and forced to pull another SCIII.

Well first off, i think StarDock is privately owned. This means they don't have as many pressures to fuck everyone over. As for forced to pull another SC3, it seems like they wanted the gameplay, and the brand

to go with it. Can't prove my assertion anymore than you can prove your wild assertions.

<And they certainly weren't 'freed' by this since they'd already been forced to make their own characters and story prior to the announcement.

I disagre. By the sounds of it, Brad was asked not to make a direct sequel by his idol when Stardock bought the rights.

>Four years ago Stardock acquired Atari's rights to Star Control. I soon got to meet my hero, Paul Reiche. He was, more than anyone else, the person who inspired me to become a game developer over 20 years ago.

>Over the past 4 years, we have communicated regarding the progress of Star Control: Origins. He asked us not to try to make a sequel to Star Control 2 and said that he hoped one day to be able to return to the universe he and Fred Ford created.

>For 4 years, people asked me why we weren't going to touch the Star Control 2 story. Now you know.

Oh and let the record show the last paragraph has a smiley face at the end.

Also, why would you want to continue the story? The Star Control 2 story obviously had things planned. This is not a position a writer wants to jump in on, as anything they do will likely retcon the original story and seem like you're flying by the seat of your pants. The word 'Freed' from the story seems like a good fit. I could see an argument for losing access to alien races, but star dock already has a line on of races which they are using. Stardock hasn't once publically claimed they had the right to the original aliens, and wasn't that part of the problem with SC3? If so, then it's doubtful Stardock bought the rights to them. Again i can't prove my assertions, but i'm fairly sure they are more accurate than yours.

>All we can do is try to put something together that releases them from the restrictions placed on their IP that they agreed to and transfer any and all rights and responsibilities to them.

<In other words, Paul and Fred are right and Stardock is preventing them from making their game as they're still arguing about some sort of contract that Stardock insists permits it.

I actually agree with you to a degree. From the sounds of it, star dock is saying "Hey guys, we bought the licenses you sold away. Sign this document saying Stardock has no relation to your product, and can't be blamed when or if you fuck up royally." I might be missing something and i'd want to reread Paul and Fred's position again. By the sounds of it though, no money is being asked in exchanged.

>>13919896

>Brad is trying to Jew Paul and Fred.

Evidence required

>He's representing their game to media as part of his expanded "Star Control" universe and simultaneously trying to force them into into an agreement where they'd be tied to Stardock if they want to continue with their game.

http://www.alistdaily.com/strategy/stardocks-strategy-bringing-star-control-back/

<We got to talk to at length with Paul and Fred, and what they hope to do someday is continue their own stories. So, what we’re going to do is make the new Star Control a multiverse, where SC1 and 2 are one universe. Since we can’t pretend that SC3 didn’t happen—that happened in a completely different universe. Our universe is going to be an alternate history with a different cast of aliens. You’re still the Earthlings, but you’ll meet a different cast of characters and that allows us to go back to the start, where humans are just going into space while dealing with how their android servants took off.

You better have some good fucking evidence to back up that bullshit.

>Brad knows that means his game is going to end up like "The Bureau: XCOM Declassified" […]

What?! Why use that game as example?! Xcom declassified was hated because gameplay wise it had nothing in relation to the original series. Stardocks game is very close to the second game. In fact it's nothing like that situation. Where is the massive retooling into a completely different and worse after announcement? The best i got is the delay because their adding customization in.

>>13923862

>Brad wants it under his 'Star Control' umbrella and has apparently been applying pressure for months.

source?

>>13931098

>Evidence required

How about this, faggot? Stardock just pulled the original Star Control games from Steam, the ones Paul and Fred claimed they didn't have the rights to and were illegally selling.

That's an admission by Stardock they were Jewing Paul and Fred. Brad's trying to bully them into an (((agreement))) and it looks like he's now getting slapped by their lawyer. What a lying piece of shit.

Also amusing, if you check the stardock forum thread, Brad's gone from 'they should talk to a lawyer' to 'their lawyer is threatening me :('. Buckled knees like the schoolyard bully he is.

>>13927793

>It's all a fucking complicated mess

i guess we just need to wait and see implying anyone will post how the whole damn thing will end and what really happened

>>13927793

>>Brad Wardell buys rights to Star Control.

He bought very little. He owns the trademark, he claims to own the "goodwill and brand recognition", but they all agree he does not have the content IP (story, aliens), and from pulling the old games from Steam his disputed claim that he had resale/copyright rights sounds like it's busted, too. He claims to have pulled them because they were 'threatened' by Paul and Fred's lawyer, but if you believe you really own something you don't pull it when someone claims otherwise.

>>Announces on the Star Control website that the reason they aren't using ST2 races is because the Toys for Bob guys are making their own game, Ghost of the Precursors, and that Stardock is cool with it.

He was bullshitting. He admits he doesn't have the rights to use the ST2 races. He'd certainly have used them if he could since it's the majority of the value of the "Star Control" IP he was trying to buy, but since he can't he pretends he's being the big guy for you.

>>Stardock fires back: Claims they aren't doing anything to prevent Ghost of the Precursors, and are encouraging it.

That's bullshit. I got Brad to admit over on the Stardock thread that he's trying to force them into an agreement to "remove restrictions" (his claim) on their sequel as he claims their announcement of a sequel makes use of the "goodwill and brand recognition" he bought. They've apparently been pushing that since at least October behind the scenes before Paul and Fred decided to lawyer up. Brad's being super weasily and claiming they're not restricting them, just 'helping' by offering to remove restrictions he claims exist. In other words, they're pushing claims of restrictions on the project.

>>13900529

Honestly, I want to think that it's either this, or it's some power play to force Stardock into giving what rights they do have back to them. We've not been given any substantial evidence on what's happening. It's nothing but an accusation with Stardock just denying it happened.

>>13922240

You brought up the Humble Monthly Bundle more times than they've sold bundles. Unrelated to what's at hand, it's worth noting that shit actually doesn't sell compared to normal bundles.

>>13935494

>We've not been given any substantial evidence on what's happening. It's nothing but an accusation with Stardock just denying it happened.

Stardock pulled the old games from Steam today. That's an admission by Stardock that Stardock falsely claimed they own those rights. Paul and Fred were right. So what else is Stardock lying about?

>>13934700

>How about this, faggot? Stardock just pulled the original Star Control games from Steam, the ones Paul and Fred claimed they didn't have the rights to and were illegally selling.

Ah shit, this means one of two things!

1) Neither Pual&Fred or Stardock own the rights as evidenced by Paul and Fred removing the game from GoG.com.

or

2) this is a standard reaction, from a company currently in a spat, and possibly going to fight a lawsuit. Keeping this game up is only going to draw more Ire from Paul and Fred, making a temporary removal make sense. Further more, being proactive and taking the product down will mitigate damage during a lawsuit even if you're in the clear.

Given the duel possibility, and not at all the ridicules lengths you'll go in a attempt to besmirch stardocks name; i once again request evidence.

Hell i got another situation like this. Alex Mauer going after the developers of River City Ransom for using her sound effects, even though she made them under contract. Instead of fighting the devs just remove all the sounds and are going to have another artist create new sounds. Obviously these devs are guilty!!! but wait, she also went after the devs of Star Mazer, and they got her to sign a contract forcing to give up any claims on their sound effect and by the sounds of it also any claim against any other developer. if so this is proof that Alex is in the wrong since she wouldn't sign the contract if she was in the right about the River City Ransom situation.

> Brad's trying to bully them into an (((agreement)))

Again, another wild assertion without evidence.

>>13935058

> He claims to have pulled them because they were 'threatened' by Paul and Fred's lawyer, but if you believe you really own something you don't pull it when someone claims otherwise.

You're a fucking moron! You take it down in case of the worst case scenario and let the lawyers duke it out. Then once the dust is settled you put it back up.

>>13935539

>1) Neither Pual&Fred or Stardock own the rights as evidenced by Paul and Fred removing the game from GoG.com.

Are you retarded? They said they did this to force Brad's claim of ownership into the light and Brad immediately folded and is crying on his forum about being 'threatened' like a little bitch.

>2) this is a standard reaction, from a company currently in a spat, and possibly going to fight a lawsuit.

When you're asserting you own something and don't have to take orders you don't take orders to take it down. Go send a letter to some developer claiming you own their game and are going to sue and see if they take it down as a standard reaction. Try Battlefront II, I'm sure EA will get right on that. Fucking moron.

>Further more, being proactive and taking the product down will mitigate damage during a lawsuit even if you're in the clear. Halting sales mitigates damage? lololol you are literally retarded, aren't you?

>>13935538

Paul and Fred pulled the games from GOG. I guess that's an admission that Stardock is right, isn't it? It is if we follow your logic. I'm curious what other lies are hidden by Paul and Fred.

>>13935816

>gamergate defense force waddles in

Logic never was your strong point.

>>13935539

>You take it down in case of the worst case scenario and let the lawyers duke it out. Then once the dust is settled you put it back up.

That is not how copyright claims work, nor does a lot of legalese work. Or even politics. Christ it's like idiots who apologize that is legally an admittance of guilt and as soon as you do that you're fucked in court.

>>13936016

>brings up gg out of nowhere like a journo

really makes you think