They specifically went for what I wrote that they would as per 2.4.
It's funny - and I'm not even a lawyer.
I will have more in a bit.
Precisely as I had written days ago, Crytek not only amended to focus on Section 2.4, they also communicated their intention to file for injunctive relief.
Which, as I explained earlier this week, is probably why the judge notes were like "Look, this is your real claim...right over here"
This is as interesting as it is exceptionally destructive because 2.4 IMPLIES a form of exclusivity whether or not CIG/RSI used CryEngine.
I think they either assumed that 2.4 would be litigated anyway on the MtD dismissal, or they were waiting to hit and prove it during discovery. The judge basically forced them to focus on it sooner than later
It was ALREADY part of the FAC as per Section C(38)
You see why there was no need to even focus on 2.4?
The judge flagged it because she too noticed this oversight.
It's also why they didn't address 2.1.2 at all because they realize that they no longer needed to.
Which brings me to...
It's absolutely mind-blowing that the judge gave them this so early on, rather than waiting for it to come up in discovery & later.
Let me explain where I am going with this...
They went in a completely different - and hilarious - direction because they claimed that 2.1.2 meant that only CIG/RSI could use CryEngine - and nobody else.
"You're all ignorant. Quit wasting my time on this bs; and go look at 2.4 which is what you SHOULD be arguing over"
This was the impetus for her granting (in part) 2.1.2 while POINTING to 2.4
Given the declarations in the FAC, I have reason to believe exclusivity WAS the intent.
Wait! It gets worse.
I bring this up for a reason. First, read this.
I said it was FALSE back in Jan.
The judge agreed in her MtD ruling. And went further. She POINTED IT OUT to Crytek.
2) The "commercial life of the game" is basically for as long ANYTHING pertaining to the Star Citizen / Squadron 42 collective IP are being sold
3) It's not terminated just because CIG stopped using CryEngine
5) Whether they are 100% using Lumberyard or not, is IRRELEVANT. The GLA is 100% in FULL force and effect for as long as SC/SQ42 are in commercial sales
Well, that's the utterly destructive nature of the 2.4 slam dunk.
"the term of the license"
Wait! It's gets worse (if you can imagine that!)
All CryTek has to prove is that the GLA was never terminated.
Since neither side is disputing this, we're off to the races.
Let's discuss that.
But for context, you should first read my Dec 2016 blog about this now infamous "switch"
CryTek licensed their engine to Amazon a few years back.
Amazon used that engine to develop a custom engine called Lumberyard.
For one thing, Amazon was allowed to not only modify, and distribute, but also sell their derivative version.
CIG/RSI had no such rights.
Since even before they finally signed the GLA, they were already building this using CryEngine.
Crytek built the 2012 pitch demos using base CryEngine.
I covered that in this thread.
Here is Chris's statement from back in 2016 after I blew the whistle.
They would STILL be in 100% breach of the GLA. Why? Because :
1) the GLA has NOT terminated as per Section 8.x
2) they've ADMITTED to BREACHING Section 2.4 - in its ENTIRETY.
In public. And it's irrefutable.
And THAT is why the judge, besides her 2.1.2 ruling, drew attention to 2.4.
This is a brilliant strategy because they KNOW that this is their own custom engine which could use either base CryEngine or Lumberyard.
Let me explain just how f-cking serious this is.
Even though they could modify the engine as per the GLA, Section 2.4 explicitly prohibited them from "directly or indirectly" doing anything "which compete with CryEngine"
They're basically creating Crytek's evidence for them.
But no, instead they were promoting their own engine, built from the licensed CryEngine.
And they've been breaching it publicly.
- CIG licensed & paid for CryEngine
- spent years + MILLIONS of backer Dollars to build Star Engine
- CryTek is ENTITLED to ALL of those improvements and...
- CAN release it FREE
And now CryTek has revised and solidified their language, while now making Star Engine the central focus of one of their most damaging claims.
Aside from being the most damaging breach of the GLA, and which will carry the most significant monetary damages, it's also going to be primary focus of...
In their SAC, Crytek removed the "punitive damages" section, not only because the judge granted it in the MtD, but because, well, they have bigger fish to fry now, and in which those damages will collectively eclipse it.
And they are completely ignoring the caliber of attorneys at Skadden.
This, my friends, is what an E.L.E looks like.
1) Star Engine source code and runtime (Star Citizen / Squadron 42)
2) Source control version logs. They use Perforce
In fact, even with a commit that has no log comment, you can download repo images and compare on your end easily.
So I fixed that, then committed the missing files in revision 371
So that is some of what Crytek now has to engage in during their review of the source code.
Wait! It gets BETTER!!
Wait! There's more!!
Not only that, they will be able to know, with 100% CERTAINTY if/when Star Engine switched.
And that aforementioned litigant will now also have access to their secrets.
In this case, all CIG had to do was
- pay for a SQ42 license : less than $2M
- promote CryEngine : free
- share CryEngine code changes : free
Three years later - here we are.
These are despicable, greedy, bastards, who have benefited from backer money, and have now all but sealed the fate of the project and company by their very actions.
What's left to be seen is if Crytek pushes for the injunction now, or after discovery. Either way, it's coming, and for CIG, there is NO escaping it because the judge herself has opened that door sooner rather than later.
Either way, win, lose, or draw, the project is DEAD. Anyone putting money in it, is just tossing it into an open flame.