[quote who="Kermamorjens" reply="221" id="3706015"]So what's in the picture above is a retweet of Kotaku and Pcgamer headlines, not their own words.[/quote] That's true, but those articles were based on P&F's October 9 blog entry, where they said "...we are now working on a direct sequel to Star Control II® -- The Ur-Quan Masters, called Ghosts of the Precursors™</
[quote who="Frogboy" reply="213" id="3705998"]Only one position has any legal merit and the other has none.[/quote] I agree, but my sense is that SirPrimalform is trying to make a pedantic point, not a legal one. At least, I'll give him the benefit of the doubt on that until he says otherwise. :-)
Regarding the game's name and quoted tweets, I think you're both right, but are making slightly different points. SirPrimalform correctly notes that F&P did not explicitly name their game "Star Control: Whatever". Frogboy is making the slightly different, but also correct point, that they used the phrase "Star Control" in such close pr
[quote who="Nahtegood11" reply="202" id="3705966"] I haven't read the previous posts in-depth, so I apologize if I'm repeating what's already been said. Anyway, I suspect that the only reason Paul and Fred are making Star Con 3 game is because Stardock is making Origins, and that they would have remained silent if Stardock hadn't ever announced their game.[/quote] I'll nip this one in the bud. In 2006, Paul and Fred told the fans that they <a href="http:/
[quote who="AuditYerTaxes" reply="196" id="3705881"]The one thing In this long running conversation I haven't heard anyone bring up is this. What did the Original 3rd party developer contract for starcontrol 2 say? This would answer many of these questions I think. Unless Paul and Fred can come up with some documentation to support their ownership...I'd prolly guess they don't have any.[/quote] They provided that contract in <a href="https://assets.documentcloud
[quote who="chapel976" reply="191" id="3705852"]Quoting Elestan, reply 187 As long as nobody claims to be giving real legal advice, I think it's the equivalent of sports commentary. well, it's a lot of speculation that could be hurting both sides and the fans. Apparently there's already a divide between TeamStardock and TeamTFB... and
[quote who="Frogboy" reply="188" id="3705847"]Let me first say I enjoy reading your posts. I think you are very thoughtful and fair-minded.[/quote] Thanks; part of the reason I make them is to try to provide a calmer alternative to people who are getting really emotional or personal about things. [quote]...having been through a lot of IP litigation over the years, even I could pick apart your analysis.[/quote] Feel free! I'd love to hear your thoughts on any o
[quote who="chapel976" reply="185" id="3705839"]I would definitely suggest people stop trying to play internet lawyer...[/quote] As long as nobody claims to be giving real legal advice, I think it's the equivalent of sports commentary. Not everyone reads legalese, the lawyers themselves aren't going to say anything, and anything the parties themselves say has to be considered biased. So the only way for people to guess the "score" is for a journalist or other person who re
[quote who="Frogboy" reply="181" id="3705810"]Stardock’s position during all that time was that Paul owned all the characters and lore in SC2. And while Stardock had a license to use them, it wouldn’t because Paul asked they not be used.[/quote] IMHO that wasn't an unreasonable position, given what you knew at that time. The question now, I think, is whether Stardock's position on this has changed, now that Paul has revealed the contract with Accolade that appears to
[quote who="SirPrimalform" reply="177" id="3705747"]If that's what happened, it does seem like a silly thing to do - why would you want someone to labour under a misapprehension?[/quote] I've thought of one possible rational explanation for keeping quiet on the trademark. Up until very recently, PR&FF were locked in to Skylanders; they weren't allowed to start work on a Star Control sequel. If they had argued successfully back then that the trademark had lapsed, then [
I think that one explanation is that P&F aren't pressing a claim to own the trademark; they're claiming nobody owns the trademark, because it was legally abandoned due to being out of use during that gap period. If they had pressed an abandonment claim back then, I think they would have had a strong case, but I'm not sure how the passage of time, Stardock's purchase of whatever rights Atari had, and subsequent development of the game may have impacted the strength of their legal a
The important thing for me is that the races be fully integrated into the universe's existing continuity. Where were they during the events of SC2? Why weren't they enslaved or wiped out by the Ur-Quan? Rather than introducing many new races, I might give each existing spacefaring race 2-3 classes of ship. Depending on when the game is set, the ships' tech level could also be higher or lower than those in SC2. You could also look at <a