- This topic has 9 replies, 5 voices, and was last updated 16 years, 12 months ago by Anonymous.
September 2, 2005 at 3:05 pm #4527AnonymousInactive
The makers of Finest Hour, Spark, have filed a lawsuit against Activision. As my legal knowledge is next to nought I was wondering what you guys would make of the article. Talking to a friend at Infinity Ward I was told that it could have ramifications on the release of Call of Duty 2…
Below is an article from gamespot for the details
September 3, 2005 at 12:27 pm #24465AnonymousInactive
ggggr, fuck sakes, all people want to do is make games!
September 5, 2005 at 9:56 am #24479AnonymousInactive
Talking to a friend at Infinity Ward I was told that it could have ramifications on the release of Call of Duty 2…[/quote:8ec9344147]
Don’t know about that. With regard to the Spark v Activision US action, pm your email (or email me) and I can send you the Amicus Brief (‘opening salvo’ served on Activision by Spark, if you want :wink: ) in *.pdf
Spark have not gone cheap on the representation, so headache at Activision – worsened by the fact that Activision did not register the development contract for confidentiality and it’s been served as evidence (hence public), I’m awaiting a copy sometime soon (as I’m following this with the IGDA’s IPR SIG)…
I’d venture that the eventual outcome will be most interesting for the industry mechanics, not in respect of the details/merits of the case itself, but in respect of lifting the lid on publisher/developer dealings and making both ‘sides’ that little bit more warier in the future… So much so that I can’t quite surmise yet if this will be good or bad for the industry – certainly a positive step for the ‘development side’ in the short-term (i.e. “small but not afraid to shoot if you f*ck me up” -type approach), but longer term… :?
September 6, 2005 at 11:28 am #24536AnonymousInactive
Judging from the discussions of this topic on TCE it seems that (as always) there are two sides to each coin. The developer (or at least their staff) seem to have done some very stupid things along the lines of taking EA IP for Medal of Honor. It also appears that the team were unable to produce parts of the product to an accetable standard and that another developer had to be brought in. It seems Activision feel the developers failings were enough to warrant cancelation of their deal while the developer doesn’t. As is often the case it will be up to the courts to decide.
Steph – could you point me toward a source for that contract?
September 6, 2005 at 11:30 am #24538AnonymousInactive
Aye I sent you a pm steph too. Cheers.
September 6, 2005 at 12:52 pm #24550AnonymousInactive
@lk_ – emailed you
@Dan – still awaiting copy, an issue’s popped up in that it shouldn’t have been served as it contains confidentiality clauses therein (a big ‘Ooops’ from Spark’s legal eagles, looks like initially)
October 6, 2005 at 11:53 pm #25968AnonymousInactive
Activision have now filed a counter suit http://www.gamespot.com/news/6135204.html
“Activision only later discovered that Allen had falsely and greatly exaggerated the role played by the Spark team in the creation, development, and production of Medal of Honor and that he had misrepresented the capabilities of Spark, whose monumental incompetence at its executive levels and inability to avoid doom without Activision’s intervention, Allen would himself later concede.”[/quote:3018e91e57] Ouch.
October 7, 2005 at 10:54 am #25972AnonymousInactive
October 7, 2005 at 6:11 pm #25987AnonymousInactive
“Allen wrote a “confidential” project review and proposal called “Looking Back, Planning Ahead.” Entered into evidence as Exhibit A–along with an e-mail from Allen”
Is Exhibit A from this counter suit in the public domain?
October 10, 2005 at 8:12 am #26008AnonymousInactive
No (not yet?), but *as usual* ( :wink: ) I’m expecting great things from the IGDA SIG.
The only interesting point about the countersuit, is that Activision have opted for a trial by jury… enter: The Big Heavy ChequeBook for Expert Witnesses :cry:
- The forum ‘Business and Legal’ is closed to new topics and replies.