Account Share

 

Thread by @dsmart: "Some of you have been messaging me about why I opted not to do the opinion breakdown of the CIG motion to dismiss in Crytek v CIG, like I di […]"

33 tweets
9 subscribers
Some of you have been messaging me about why I opted not to do the opinion breakdown of the CIG motion to dismiss in Crytek v CIG, like I did the original filing below.

threadreaderapp.com/thread/9496260…
Simple.

After going through the actual motion, I came to the conclusion that it was best that, unlike those other YT lawyers who are as clueless as the backers, I just wait for the upcoming rebuttal that I was certain was forthcoming from Crytek.
I found it astonishing beyond belief that experienced attorneys at FKKS would not only file such a nonsensical and flawed motion, that aside from not addressing 2 of the issues, it all but guaranteed the judge would dismiss it in its entirety. After she stops laughing.
Not only did they spend time trying to re-define the meaning of "exclusive", that they walked into so many of Skadden's traps that the only reasonable conclusion one can draw, is that they are just buying time & trying to see how serious Crytek is with their lawsuit.
Meanwhile, the toxic Shitizens parked on the dysfunctional cesspit that is their Reddit enclave, are quick to parrot the flawed opinions from non-practicing attorneys like Leonard French, who barely read, let alone understood, the GLA that was in dispute.
As far as those guys are concerned, CIG's response was totally not an Ortwin fueled PR stunt, but was a slam dunk that all but settled the case in their favor.

These are same guys funding what has become a Ponzi scheme and an outright scam of epic proportions.
Lost in the noise are morsels of facts which prove beyond doubt that Chris Roberts and his team blatantly LIED about the assets that were shown during the 2012 campaign.

Assets and demos which were NOT from the game, but rather created by Crytek as proof of concept.
These very assets being passed of as "in game" during the campaign, were created by some people who are still with Crytek, while others like Sean Tracey had since jumped ship to CIG.
Very credible sources have since told me that those very tech demos were created by Tracey and his team.

In his own words, from Oct 2012, Tracey is on the record saying that they create "Cover Demos" in order to "close deals" for engine licenses.
This was a time when the decision was between UE3 and CE3, and it was Tracey's job to do whatever it took to win the engine license for Crytek, and to produce a prototype "fast and cheap".

And between himself, Hannes and Paul, as well as outsourced artists, they created the demo
This was even before there was an RSI or CIG.

Sources tell me that during that time, Chris Roberts was the CCO for a company called Blink Media in Vancouver, for which he executed an agreement to evaluate CE3 for his yet unnamed project.
And agreement that was signed by Carl Jones obo Crytek.

The same Carl Jones that is mentioned in the Crytek complaint, and who at the time was the director of global business development for Crytek.
All this goes way back to around the beginning of 2010.

By the time Chris Roberts left Blink Media, and he was already sold on the idea of using CE3, Crytek had agreed to create his tech demo for him.

That effort was led by Sean Tracey. In 2011.
The period between 2010 to the Nov 2012 signing of the GLA are key to understanding how and why Crytek would have ultimately required CIG to EXCLUSIVELY use CryEngine for Star Citizen, after expending so many resources to help them pull it off.
And what the GLA doesn't show, are the sort of things that get exposed during depositions and discovery whereby emails, messages etc, are used in supporting the spirit and intent of the GLA, and the requirement for CIG to exclusively use CryEngine.
Time and time again I have stated that when push comes to shove, a LOT of people simply do NOT like, nor trust Chris Roberts, and that there WILL come a time when EVERYONE, past and present, would get a chance to expose him in a legal setting without repercussions.
These 4 people, Chris & Erin, Roberts, Ortwin Freyermuth, Sandi Gardiner (wife of Chris Roberts) used lies, deception and misrepresentation to not only rip off backers to the tune of $176M, but in the process unjustly enriched themselves under the guise of making two games.
If nothing else, this Crytek lawsuit, which is integral to their operations, is going to not only expose ALL of them, but my guess is that by the time Skadden is done, I wouldn't be surprised if that's when the govt. makes their move which would see people go to jail or plead out
Those wondering why CIG was so desperate to have RSI removed (they will fail) from the complaint, should immediately understand why that is.

The list of shell companies is amazing.

dereksmart.com/forum/index.ph…
Though it appears as if CIG was sitting at the top of the shell chain as far back as 2012, since that time, RSI which has NO employees, and is just a shell corp, has evolved to be the "shadow" corp that holds certain assets shielded from other liabilities.
That Chris Roberts signed obo of RSI and CIG in Exhibit 4 (3.9) of the GLA, and that their main website houses the game's community, assets etc, even certain cloud services IP addresses, are material to making RSI a party to the lawsuit.
That they would seek to have a key shell company from the liabilities of a lawsuit, and shell corp which has NO insurance liability protection (which only CIG has, as per their own filing) is key to understanding why they would want to keep RSI shielded fro this lawsuit.
It's the oldest trick in the corp book. In the event that they have to scuttle CIG and F42 worldwide due to liabilities in the face of a disastrous lawsuit, whatever assets remain in RSI, would be shielded.

Skadden aren't stupid, and this isn't their first rodeo.
It's also interesting to note that even Ortwin's own private company, Twin Bros US/GER, is also intertwined in this fiasco as we have actual actionable evidence that it has been used to not only receive money from the project, but also used to issue refunds to backers.
Though Ortwin's involvement in the project isn't a cause of action in the complaint, Skadden must have a specific reason for highlighting his blatant conflict of interest in his negotiating a now contested GLA obo of BOTH parties.
If his conflict waiver, which CIG opted not to include in their response, ever becomes public, I believe that it will shed more light as to what Skadden was going for when they specifically shoved him into a minefield, then tossed a grenade into his lap - just to be sure.
Key to Ortwin's involvement is that ANY dispute arising from the GLA, is squarely his responsibility.

And if he never disclosed to Crytek that he was in fact a partner and co-founder of the project, then he is in big trouble. Attorneys have been disbarred for a LOT less.
And to cap all his troubles, notwithstanding being the co-founder, he's basically made himself a material witness to this dispute, and can look forward to being grilled by Skadden over it. He CANNOT asset privilege without running into a contempt complaint.
Every single one of the 4 causes of action Crytek is claiming, have very dire consequences for the company and project, as they are material breaches.

To the extent that all it takes is for Crytek to prevail on a SINGLE one, and it's goodnight, sweet dreams for Star Citizen.
With CIG being the only entity covered by liability insurance, and which most likely doesn't even have a cap in the region of what Crytek would be entitled to, it stands to reason that they are going to be in a world of hurt before long.
Not to mention that if it's one claim that biz liability insurance companies love to deny, it's whereby their client loses cases involving intentional and negligent lawsuits like what Skadden is claiming RSI/CIG did in this regard.
I look forward to reading the reactions to Skadden's upcoming rebuttal, as well as the judge's Feb 9th ruling on the motion to dismiss. If nothing else, we will get a clear idea of where this is headed. But for my money, I'm calling it right now. They're fucked. Completely.
Blink Media Inc, the Vancouver co Chris Roberts used to be CCO in 2010, is now defunct. It used to be at blinkmediainc.com and Chris used to work for Bruce McMillan when they evaluated CE3 for the game.

linkedin.com/in/bruce-mcmil…
Missing some Tweet in this thread?
You can try to force a refresh.
9 subscribers
This content can be removed from Twitter at anytime, get a PDF archive by mail!
This is a Premium feature, you will be asked to pay $30.00/year
for a one year Premium membership with unlimited archiving.
Don't miss anything from @dsmart,
subscribe and get alerts when a new unroll is available!
This is a Premium feature, you will be asked to pay $30.00/year
for a one year Premium membership with unlimited subscriptions/alert.
Did Thread Reader help you today?
Support me: I'm a solo developer! Read more about the story
Become a 💎 Premium member ($30.00/year) and get exclusive features!
Too expensive?
Make a small donation instead. Buy me a coffee ($5) or help for the server cost ($10):
Donate with 😘 Paypal or  Become a Patron 😍 on Patreon.com
Using crypto? You can help too!
Trending hashtags
Did Thread Reader help you today?
Support me: I'm a solo developer! Read more about the story
Become a 💎 Premium member ($30.00/year) and get exclusive features!
Too expensive?
Make a small donation instead. Buy me a coffee ($5) or help for the server cost ($10):
Donate with 😘 Paypal or  Become a Patron 😍 on Patreon.com
Using crypto? You can help too!