Big time lawsuits brewing between Valve and Vivendi
- Thread starter Netherscourge
- Start date
cadaveca
Newbie
- Joined
- Aug 29, 2004
- Messages
- 997
- Reaction score
- 0
I want valve to wiun...but if anyone was wondering what happened to last weeks preload, we all know now what happened.
the outlook for valve is bleak. they have gone quite overboard with HL2 and all the surrounding mumbojumbo...don't get me wrong, i hope that they win, so that they have some money for the creation of HL3, but i don't think that will happen.
this should not affect the release...if anything, vivendi want the release to continue, (and what gabe claims is probably true, only about 175000 poeple have preloaded so sar, minor considering HL2 should sell 4-5 million copies the first few weeks) and should sales via steam be great, vivendi wants a slice of the pie.
effectively, to release the game on steam, and not pay your distributor any royalties, is entering yourself in direct competition with your distributor. the only way for valve to come out ahead is for them to buy all the empty boxes, and recoup lost sales for vivendi, and give them another crappy game, and not to release HL2...at least not under the cureent name. i think this was valve tried with CZ...
if they were to delay the release of HL2 to nexst year, you bet there are going to be alot of pissed off fans, and potential for sales drops dramatically. Really, noone should buy a retail copy, and all of us should be going with steam....but this would only screw valve over.
the court case more than likely will not get decided soon...and will be in the appeal and deliberation process for long after HL2 hits the shelves. When things are already in court, if one side delays something, it REALLY put them in bad light for potential lost revenues...due to whatever decisions that lost the money.
this is probably why valve have had no date of release since last year... the longer it takes them, the better their chances of losing money. Fortunately for them, there have been some major changes in the industy, with new pixel shaders, new directx, and even faster video cards."uh, sorry, we cannot give you the gameyet, as if we do not cater to every individual, we are shortchanging ourselves." "this number of people have this card...and we cannot play our game on it. What!?! only 13%! of 4 billion dollars, man! 4 billion! we gotta make some revisions to the code, so that they buy the game too!"
anyway, when HL2 does come out, if it looks like FARCRY, DOOM3, and MaxPayne2, all roled into one, I'll be a happy man.
summary hearing will dictate what happens to the money one the game goes on sale...I don't think it will be release until then, and this is why they pushed for the earlier hearing. "Look...the games done...you can put it on the shelves. We've done our part...."
and vivendi looks bad, because it's now not valve causing delay, but vivendi....
the outlook for valve is bleak. they have gone quite overboard with HL2 and all the surrounding mumbojumbo...don't get me wrong, i hope that they win, so that they have some money for the creation of HL3, but i don't think that will happen.
this should not affect the release...if anything, vivendi want the release to continue, (and what gabe claims is probably true, only about 175000 poeple have preloaded so sar, minor considering HL2 should sell 4-5 million copies the first few weeks) and should sales via steam be great, vivendi wants a slice of the pie.
effectively, to release the game on steam, and not pay your distributor any royalties, is entering yourself in direct competition with your distributor. the only way for valve to come out ahead is for them to buy all the empty boxes, and recoup lost sales for vivendi, and give them another crappy game, and not to release HL2...at least not under the cureent name. i think this was valve tried with CZ...
if they were to delay the release of HL2 to nexst year, you bet there are going to be alot of pissed off fans, and potential for sales drops dramatically. Really, noone should buy a retail copy, and all of us should be going with steam....but this would only screw valve over.
the court case more than likely will not get decided soon...and will be in the appeal and deliberation process for long after HL2 hits the shelves. When things are already in court, if one side delays something, it REALLY put them in bad light for potential lost revenues...due to whatever decisions that lost the money.
this is probably why valve have had no date of release since last year... the longer it takes them, the better their chances of losing money. Fortunately for them, there have been some major changes in the industy, with new pixel shaders, new directx, and even faster video cards."uh, sorry, we cannot give you the gameyet, as if we do not cater to every individual, we are shortchanging ourselves." "this number of people have this card...and we cannot play our game on it. What!?! only 13%! of 4 billion dollars, man! 4 billion! we gotta make some revisions to the code, so that they buy the game too!"
anyway, when HL2 does come out, if it looks like FARCRY, DOOM3, and MaxPayne2, all roled into one, I'll be a happy man.
summary hearing will dictate what happens to the money one the game goes on sale...I don't think it will be release until then, and this is why they pushed for the earlier hearing. "Look...the games done...you can put it on the shelves. We've done our part...."
and vivendi looks bad, because it's now not valve causing delay, but vivendi....
Element Alpha
Newbie
- Joined
- Oct 5, 2003
- Messages
- 741
- Reaction score
- 0
This is nice, very nice. What melodrama will be next? I wonder.
It's true that you can compare the music companies with games publishers. All they do is tie developers/musicians (the creative party) in a contract designed to suck the blood out of their body. They wouldn't have the money to publish it themselves, so it's either sign or resign. But now, with the internet, everything is possible.
It strucks me how CS:CZ was delayed till after the holiday season. Strange for a company who seeks to make money.
And in 2000 things did look differently. So arguing about he said this, and I said that and then he said he wouldn't know what the hell that closure we're trying to change would be good for anyway is just lame.
When I book a holliday next time I'll ask the operator if the weather is fine where I'm going. If it turns out it's raining when I'm there, I'll just sue them because they said it wasn't when I asked them.
All these publishers & editors will eventually fade out of business. I wonder what folly they'll achieve before they do.
Viva la revolution internet! information for all! music, books, games, movies, all with no boundaries!
It's true that you can compare the music companies with games publishers. All they do is tie developers/musicians (the creative party) in a contract designed to suck the blood out of their body. They wouldn't have the money to publish it themselves, so it's either sign or resign. But now, with the internet, everything is possible.
It strucks me how CS:CZ was delayed till after the holiday season. Strange for a company who seeks to make money.
And in 2000 things did look differently. So arguing about he said this, and I said that and then he said he wouldn't know what the hell that closure we're trying to change would be good for anyway is just lame.
When I book a holliday next time I'll ask the operator if the weather is fine where I'm going. If it turns out it's raining when I'm there, I'll just sue them because they said it wasn't when I asked them.
All these publishers & editors will eventually fade out of business. I wonder what folly they'll achieve before they do.
Viva la revolution internet! information for all! music, books, games, movies, all with no boundaries!
blahblahblah
Newbie
- Joined
- Nov 16, 2003
- Messages
- 5,036
- Reaction score
- 0
I don't think Valve should win. Valve shouldn't have to relinquish their IP rights (even though they bullied them from Sierra), but they shouldn't get away scot free.
Frankly, it is looking like the original Half-Life was an accident. For every step that Valve takes, they take one step back. I don't follow other developers like Epic or ID software, but I doubt they have as much troubles as Valve.
Frankly, it is looking like the original Half-Life was an accident. For every step that Valve takes, they take one step back. I don't follow other developers like Epic or ID software, but I doubt they have as much troubles as Valve.
Valve isn't exactly your typical developer. I don't see the iDs and Epics of this world going into direct competition with their publisher by offering their games totally online.
Anyways, really, I think this mess seems to be pretty much Vivendi's fault. They signed on the dotted line handing over online distributing rights to Valve without really thinking about the implications. If they think Valve were just gonna sit on rights like that they were being breathtakingly naive. So now, seeing that Steam is going to take away a slice of their very fine pie, they want the whole pie back. Greed, pure and simple.
Anyways, really, I think this mess seems to be pretty much Vivendi's fault. They signed on the dotted line handing over online distributing rights to Valve without really thinking about the implications. If they think Valve were just gonna sit on rights like that they were being breathtakingly naive. So now, seeing that Steam is going to take away a slice of their very fine pie, they want the whole pie back. Greed, pure and simple.
H
Hardcore310
Guest
If Vivendi did give valve the rights to distribute the game via online/steam then I don't understand what the problem is. How can they even take this to court. Who cares what Gabe said about not being able to make money online.
The fact is, vivendi signed the deal and what's done is done. Valve will win this, do not worry.
The fact is, vivendi signed the deal and what's done is done. Valve will win this, do not worry.
mortiz
Newbie
- Joined
- Sep 3, 2003
- Messages
- 4,074
- Reaction score
- 0
The thing is VALVe are one of the biggest independent developers today (ignoring companies like Sony and EA who publish and develop their own games) so the spotlight is more focused on them than most developers, especially when they're bringing out what could be considered the most anticipated game of the past two years.
Think of it this way, the original law suit was brought up in 2002, and we had no idea about any dodgy dealings between VALVe and VU until now, and that was between a big developer and a big publisher. Imagine how many cases like this go un-noticed by the general public.
Think of it this way, the original law suit was brought up in 2002, and we had no idea about any dodgy dealings between VALVe and VU until now, and that was between a big developer and a big publisher. Imagine how many cases like this go un-noticed by the general public.
This prob wont effect the release. No one has anything to gain by postponing it.
Unless Vivendi is going to postpone the release untill the court date so that they can shut down distribution via steam. But that prob wont happen... prob.
Unless Vivendi is going to postpone the release untill the court date so that they can shut down distribution via steam. But that prob wont happen... prob.
Annihilator_91
Newbie
- Joined
- Aug 18, 2004
- Messages
- 300
- Reaction score
- 0
This could get nassssty! :flame: What I we get screwed? ;(
mortiz said:
I talked about this before... Valve is a small developer in comparison with others... like blizzard, id, relic, etc
They have a single office (rather than a multiple) and prob around only 20-100 employees and have only released a handfull of titles. In my book, thats small
Why not? Copyright should be enough.Pi Mu Rho said:
IP isn't even in the laws yet if i remember correctly, and (IMO of course) hopefully shouldn't stay.
IP and Softwarepatents is just another way to earn money, and restrict others.
Unfortunately it kinda loops itself meaning that if you don't keep your eye on the ball you will lose everything.
IP belongs to whoever made the thing.
Think of it this way... If someone payed you to make a painting the painting is yours unless part of the agreement was to hand over the rights to the painting.
i'm not sure if this is the case here... there arent enough details yet... but my bet is that it isnt the case. I think VUG or Sierra only wanted a portion of the proceeds.
In my opinion the only place Valve is in the wrong is with the steam distribution but even that is a grey area. They'll prob get away like bandits.
Think of it this way... If someone payed you to make a painting the painting is yours unless part of the agreement was to hand over the rights to the painting.
i'm not sure if this is the case here... there arent enough details yet... but my bet is that it isnt the case. I think VUG or Sierra only wanted a portion of the proceeds.
In my opinion the only place Valve is in the wrong is with the steam distribution but even that is a grey area. They'll prob get away like bandits.
deathscent
Newbie
- Joined
- Apr 28, 2004
- Messages
- 96
- Reaction score
- 0
woah.... thats all i can say to anything...
blahblahblah
Newbie
- Joined
- Nov 16, 2003
- Messages
- 5,036
- Reaction score
- 0
Pi Mu Rho said:
From a business perspective, it looks like an accident. Not a talent perspective. Valve is horrible for organizing business activities.
I made a mistake about the IP rights.
IP is important. For it to disappear would hurt game developers, publishers and consumers alike.
FISKER_Q said:
Maybe one day when your a real developer you will understand... Copyrights are somewhat hard to come by and without IP its first come first serve or maybe highest pay of first serve. IP protects things like this post I'm writing. If you were to say you owned this post right now I could use the IP clause and sue you to death.
IP is a definate must for the small time developer
- Joined
- Aug 5, 2003
- Messages
- 9,356
- Reaction score
- 165
Damn right. I've spent several years creating a coherent universe to set a game in. And it's *mine*. I don't want someone else to be able to waltz along and use it without having to get permission from me.
mortiz
Newbie
- Joined
- Sep 3, 2003
- Messages
- 4,074
- Reaction score
- 0
Raziel-Jcd said:
Intellectual Property i.e
Property that enjoys legal protection and stems from the exercise of the mind. Includes patents, trademarks, copyright, design protection and some minor rights.
Basically if you thought of it you own it
forgot to add: unless you signed it over to whoever paid you to do it.
blahblahblah
Newbie
- Joined
- Nov 16, 2003
- Messages
- 5,036
- Reaction score
- 0
Raziel-Jcd said:
Intellectual Property. It is also called Intangible Property in the business world as well however that covers some more things besides intellectual property.
There are two types of things in the world, physical things - things that physically exist like televisions, cars, radios, computers, etc. And intangible things - like an idea, a movie script, software code. Most intangible things do not have much physical value at all. The computer code for HL2 can fit onto a CD-R, does that means it is worth $1.50? No, because there is intrinsic value to that code that has additional value to other people. This is where IP rights come in and protect people. Because if I take a persons IP, it is the equivalent to taking somebody's car or house. Just because it doesn't have a physically presence doesn't mean it doesn't exist or doesn't have value associated to it.
blahblahblah said:
Just to add.. .it can be physical property as well. But IP doesnt dictate value.. just ownership. In the case of HL the code, art, universe, plot etc is all owned under the IP clause (cant quote it exactly, maybe someone else can) which can be sold or signed over by whoever is paying for the game to be made. In most cases this is the publisher.
Small time developer? I would consider most people involved in open source software a small time developer. However they pretty much all despite it.DrPowers said:
I agree it has its advantages, but it gets abused too much.
As you said you could sue my ass. And that's where the money comes in. You could pretty much also sue me just for quoting you.
And when the companies income source gets threatened they immediately convert to IP/Patent companys, getting money by royalties.
Pretty much all patents are accepted unless patented or applied for before. Which means that people actually having prior-act gets the disadvantage, he has to prove he was prior to the other company, while their money stroll in from royalties.
I am a developer, i give all my code as public domain. That or through the BSD-License.
Agent.M
Newbie
- Joined
- May 24, 2004
- Messages
- 1,180
- Reaction score
- 0
Nex321 said:
Dont go by what wishful thinking kids say on these forums...be realistic dont look for the game till nov IMO, however there may be a slight chance at a october release maybe there is just to much going on right now for it to be any sooner!
blahblahblah
Newbie
- Joined
- Nov 16, 2003
- Messages
- 5,036
- Reaction score
- 0
DrPowers said:
I think it is easier to associate value with it because that is how financial reporting is done (which is the way I learned about intangible property). Chances are if you have IP, it is going to be worth something. You wouldn't have or need IP if nobody wanted it. But you are more right in a pure technical sense.
You are right about the physical property as well - it can be both. However, it is easier for most people to understand the issue at hand if you seperate physical property from intangible property.
FISKER_Q said:
I've never heard anyone take a negative stance against ownership rights.
Imagine I was writing a book of which I hadnt completed and therefore couldnt purchase a copyright etc. If it wasnt for IP someone could steal a draft publish it themselves and make all my money of MY property. How on earth is that fair.
I understad the BSD-Lic and I agree with it and am glad its around. But giving all your code as a public domain is a bad business practice and will never work. Imagine you trying to sell it. There will always be someone who will sell it for less becuase they have nothing invested in it. They just took it from you and your left with nothing.
IPs a bad idea... I think not
