You can read it in all its apocalyptic glory on Pacer or at the link below.
I certainly wasn't expecting the beatdown Skadden delivered.
If you look at the Skadden or Crytek feeds, you should see the usual suspects already at it
Though he has since walked back his original comments from the video, the damage was already done because the clueless toxic backers were all over the place spreading blatantly bullshit information from French, while attacking dissenting opinions.
For the record, him being a Star Citizen backer isn't all that relevant, except that anyone with a functioning brain, can easily see the bias in his opinions.
He has a Patreon and makes YT videos for which he earns an average of about $135 per video from viewer donations, excluding ads.
All the more reason to expect professional and unbiased opinions.
These guys have law degrees btw and you would think they ought to know better.
I don't even care about giving them views by linking, I want people to see what I'm talking about.
Skadden opened their filing by repeating all the 5 key points of contention in the complaint.
Shortly after that, the hilarity began...
This heavily argued section led to the hilarious attempt by CIG to re-define the meaning of the word "exclusively". But we'll get to that in a bit.
Such improvements btw would be restricted to only CryEngine itself, not the custom code that makes up Star Citizen, and which CIG is calling Star Engine.
e.g. When we licensed Havok Vision Engine, it came with licenses for FMOD, RakNet etc. We didn't need to get those licenses.
For example in the past when licensing Unreal Engine which has support for Scaleform, you would need your own Scaleform license to use it.
Those being RSI and CIG.
Good, now read 1.5.
By signing that exhibit, the signing parties are bound by that license, which is part of the GLA.
It is hilarious to suggest that RSI would have a license to exhibit 4, without the GLA that INCLUDES it.
But that's CIG's argument.
And that is why Crytek are claiming that RSI is party to the GLA, and thus the alleged breaches therein.
If CIG switched engines when they WERE allowed to, they have to PROVE it. If ANY code from CE3 is in the game, they're screwed.
As a dev, I can safely say that even with the similarities between CE3 and LY, figuring out whether they switched and when, is patently trivial.
It only gets worse from there.
1st being the issue of CIG sending updates of the engine back to Crytek.
And Skadden came in hard and fast.
The fun part.
The GLA hasn't terminated.
Even if CIG did in fact switch to LY, they are still obligated to continue providing any/all custom revisions they make, to Crytek.
It gets worse...
That finding should lay to rest the bullshit that backers have said, in that CIG is sharing their awesome (lol!) code with Amazon.
I remain 100% confident that I am RIGHT, and that they're going to be exposed.
And this is why we have version control repo logs.
Goddamn! I want to be on that discovery forensics team.
Not to mention the fact that it would have been presented (under seal) during discovery anyway.
Ortwin is an idiot. This is all him.
This is the result. It's beautiful.
If the court finds that RSI was a party to the GLA, then it too is on the hook, just like CIG.
tbh, I don't even know how people are arguing over this issue. It seems so clear.
1 engine. Multiple features.
The GLA even allowed for DLC which DO require the main game in order to operate.
When they decided to sell SQ42 separately, is when they would have run afoul of the GLA.
Key here is that they pre-paid their royalties on Star Citizen - at a discount
So it seems to me that Crytek would have been entitled to royalties and license fee under the GLA for a separate title - but not DLC.
In fact, some of those trailers are right there on YouTube.
And they bear NO similarity to what later became SQ42 proper.
It's remarkable in its dissent.
Now it's up to the judge, who I hear is a Goon. So I think we win.
Both FKKS and Skadden are professional law firms. Though the latter are also reputation protection firms, there was no reason for the open hostility in their answer.
Here, I did a diff of both the original & the amended complaint.
A waiver that they spent so many pages bitching about.
"OK, we were done with this, but since you want to keep making a big deal out of it, here, shove this."
To me, that's epic.
In fact, Skadden's response went into even more depth as to why I believe that he is going to get disbarred if this goes as far as I think it will.
Sources tell me that the waiver doesn't say a SINGLE WORD about that.
CryEngine eval, tech demos etc: 2010 - 2011
Ortwin waiver: Feb 2012
CIG LLC formed: April 2012
GLA: Nov 2012
RSI Corp formed: April 2013
GLA amendment: Sept 2014
RSI LLC formed: Nov 2017
That's 1yr after the GLA itself was signed on Nov 20, 2012.
And Skadden has highlighted this conflict in the strongest of terms.
CIG forced their hand.
1) they spent so many words defending his virginity in a case that didn't even list it as a cause of action
2) they didn't include the waiver would show and PROVE that he never disclosed that he was a principal in the venture he was negotiating
I knew it was going to be brutal, but I honestly wasn't expecting the extent to which it ended up being so.
I hope that instead of just licking their wounds and wait for the Feb 9th ruling, that Ortwin plants more land mines by responding
Industry is small enough that everyone is talking, and we ALL know what is REALLY going on with Star Citizen
So it's irrelevant to me how people view sourced material. Believe what you want, I don't care. And nobody cares what YOU think.
The execs have unjustly enriched themselves by taking advantage of gamers whereby SEVEN YEARS and $176 MILLION DOLLARS later, they haven't even delivered 20% of the TWO games promised.
Now we wait to see what CIG does. God, I hope they respond.