Connect
- 283 Comments
-
Bethesda: "Our arguments have been consistent". But have they?
After Bethesda's claims that Interplay was only licensed the Fallout name for use in its Fallout MMO and Interplay's response, Bethesda has yesterday filed their own counterclaim to Interplay's counterclaim, which alleged that Bethesda's statements have been inconsistent. However, you can actually find an example of such an inconsistency below.
Bethesda repeats its original claim, based on their interpretation of the wording of the Trademark License Agreement (TLA). While Interplay argues that "Fallout brand" in the context of the agreement is not synonymous with "Fallout trademark", and was defined in the original Exclusive Licensing Agreement, and that the original intent was clearly for Interplay to create an actual Fallout game, and not "an online baseball game or poker game called 'Fallout'", Bethesda claims otherwise.
“ Ignoring these determinative facts, Interplay seeks to create confusion and ambiguity where none exists. Interplay’s opposition is in its entirety based on the unsupported contention that the term “FALLOUT-branded MMOG” is somehow “ambiguous.” Interplay seeks to introduce extrinsic evidence to alter the clear language and terms of the parties’ agreements. Parol evidence, however, is neither permitted nor warranted here. The term “FALLOUTbranded MMOG” is plain and clear on its face – it means an MMOG named FALLOUT. Bethesda gave Interplay a license to call its MMOG “Fallout” if it met the conditions of the TLA. (See Bethesda Mem. at p. 5.) Nothing else was licensed to Interplay. The APA and TLA also contain undisputed, unambiguous integration clauses prohibiting admission of extrinsic agreements or understandings.” |
While Interplay argues that sections 3.4 and 9.3.4 of the TLA support the interpretation that Interplay was granted the right to use elements of the Fallout setting, Bethesda states that the detailed accounting of elements of the Fallout-branded MMOG that Interplay would not be able to continue to use if it were not to satisfy the conditions of the license simply "confirms that Bethesda owns all Fallout intellectual property".
“ I. BETHESDA HAS NO DUTY TO ALLOW INTERPLAY TO USE ALL FALLOUT INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY ASSETS
Neither the APA nor the TLA creates any duty or obligation on Bethesda’s part to allow Interplay the use of any Fallout related intellectual property assets which it unconditionally sold to Bethesda. In its opposition, Interplay fails to cite one single contractual provision in either agreement that would create such a duty. Instead, Interplay engages in a convoluted analysis of simple and straightforward agreements in a last-ditch effort to present parol evidence. Given the clarity of the relevant agreements, parol evidence is unnecessary and inappropriate. Dismissal of amended counterclaims I and II is warranted as a matter of law.” |
Bethesda states that Interplay never allowed Bethesda to view any Fallout Online development documents, even though Interplay, in its earlier filings, invited Bethesda representatives to view them, but objected to copying of the trade secret document and publicly submitting it as court evidence.
In the filing, it is also claimed that Bethesda had not raised the issue of Interplay not being allowed to use any Fallout-related assets earlier, suing for breach of contract on the grounds of not fulfilling the financial and development requirements, only because "Bethesda only recently learned of Interplay’s multiple infringements from Interplay’s public marketing materials". Interplay actually started releasing official materials using Fallout assets in June 2010, over 6 months before Bethesda made this claim. And proof of concept screenshots with super mutants and Nuka-Cola were admitted as court evidence back in 2009.
Bethesda also argues that Interplay should be denied additional discovery regarding the meaning and scope of the term "FALLOUT-branded MMOG". According to them, "For all the reasons discussed above, extrinsic evidence of intent is unnecessary, unwarranted and inappropriate here."
- Showing 25 most recent
283 comments
-
@ AFGHAN PSYCHO
Wow you finally said something worth agreeing to, BOS would have brought the game in the wrong direction. I didn't attack you 1st off , I was setting the record straight, a fix if you will. I'm totally for Bethesda keeping the genre alive when Interplay couldn't. I wouldn't know anything about 4 yr olds soiling their pants but I could use the same comeback considering what you had wrote in response( maybe you can fill me in on what a 4 yr old with soiled pants sounds like, I really wouldn't know. If your 4 yr old is just shitting there pants, it sounds like you need to do some potty training & get off Fallout and wiki. 4 yr olds shouldn't be shitting themselves), but I wasn't trying to be childish. Some people act juvenile or just are juvenile. Fallout was never broken & I'm sure this is where we start to disagree. The game could be just a distant memory if it wasn't for Bethesda, Credit given. But what I'm saying is that the game would have never existed or had such a following if it wasn't for Interplay. I Have Facts, You have analogies. I have better things to do than bicker about something I have no control over. Your entitled to whatever opinion you please, just don't try to change mine. That's where the battles begin. I can care less of how things are between Interplay or Bethesda...as long as a decent game is produced that doesn't fuck up the story or universe too much. I feel the Fallout of today is Easier than the Interplay era fallouts, the game needs a difficulty tweaking, and a list of other things that I'd rather not get into. I'm glad that someone took the game under their wing, regardless of who. These arguments we have will do nobody any good because they're just opinions that will reflect nothing to no one or do any good in any way. Everyone has 1 & honestly I don't care to hear them.
-
I don't see the reason to your logic because even all of the hardcore interplay fanatics that I know didn't like and/or hated BOS.
-
I guess the game still presents a valid part of the story, even though the game didn't live up to expectations. Storyline is 85% of every game. If the story sucks, the game sucks also.
-
Though I have to thank Acid claus for defending, I have to agree with Tagziel( like your username) about your analogy. You mixed up the critical positions of almost everyone that made Fallout 1 and 2 and made it successful. Also,Xcessive1, are you on your period dear sir? I ask that because I replyed to your comment, and you reply back sounded like it was typed by a four year old that had fit a soiled his pants? May I ask what was the reason you attacked me? I never said anything that would offend till now simply because you do not posses the common sense to understand what I am easily pointing out. Don't get me wrong, I have great respect for Interplay for producing a game with the level of gameplay and quality such as Fallout 1 and 2. However, they were becoming ALMOST exactly like Picasso in his latter career.What he did was he would paint terrible paintings that he personally said were, for a quick buck. Interplay did the same thing with BOS; they knew it was a broken game, yet still released it. Crappy analogies and bickering aside, we all have to agree that Fallout would have been heading in the wrong direction if BOS had been successful.
-
Whether or not Xcessive1 is on his/her rag, I believe 99.9% of the room would still agree with him/her.
-
"Brian Fargo Presents"........have you ever played the 1st Fallout Acid claus? LOL seems like you were too busy giving Bethesda hand jobs for something they never produced, & they only turned it into a product they already had once they got they're stinking hands on it. To me that's not an improvement, just an immitation of someone else's hard work. Better? No Just up to date and playable. Considering how many idiots are addicted to some types of online crap like COD or Halo. Those games to me don't set the standard... I'm spoiled when it comes playability and replayability. COD and Halo just get old too fast, Fallout in my mind seems to be endless, Interplay had that issue locked up pretty fast. Multiple endings and endless game play is what i wanted and they delivered before anyone else way back in 1997. Way before anyone else came into the picture. If fallout was still 2D on a PC I'd still buy it, the storyline alone is what kept me coming back and always will as long as Bethesda doesn't fuck it up. Bethesda is lucky to have me buy their product, considering it looks and plays like Oblivion. They couldn't make their own "Fallout " game, that's why they bought the fans and concepts from Interplay For 5.7 million dollars. I only bought Fallout 3 and Fallout New Vegas because it has the Interplay essence i Love, not because it was newer or looked and played like Oblivion. If developers wanted to make a killing in the game market they'd have to make their games replayable and not feel like the same game the 1st time around. Truth.
-
LOL @ Acid Claus - I'm not arguing with you, and you trying to jump into my arguments makes you the childish raging Bethesda penis lover.
My points have been made, & just because you come in here claiming to know something about nothing doesn't give you the right to direct shit at me. Your long winded rant about some restaurant gave me a headache after the 1st paragraph and i didn't bother to read anymore. It makes me happy to see you wasted an hour or two of your life trying to decide what to write back in response to something that wasn't even directed at you. Like I said before Bethesda took Fallout and made it Oblivion. Honestly can you really deny that? You can make any "over the top" analogy you want, you'll never change my views or opinions on this issue. You were probably 5 yrs old in 1997, what would you really know? So go waste your time some more making some stupid comments. Furthermore, Mind Your Own Business. If you want me to respond, make a good, valid point.....not some bullshit you looked up on the internet. Don't make me waste another 5 minutes of my life responding to your garbage....
-
Here's a kind hearted public advice: shut up and cease posting analogies. Outside the most simple of comparisons, they do not make sense and you do not look any smarter if you post an analogy no one can understand.
-
i Agree 100% , don't post an analogy unless it makes sense (Acid Claus). Your analogy is pointless unless you make it short and sweet. If your head is stuck up Bethesda's ass then your name might be acid claus.
-
@Xcessive1 - Your childish rage and ridiculous analogy to automobiles only proves that you have absolutely no idea what you are talking about.
Let me use a better analagy. Let's pretend that Interplay circa 1997 was a great local restaurant that won a bunch of awards and everybody in and around the area liked. Now pretend that restaurant got bought by a chain of foreign restaurants who were most famous for their Turd sandwich (aka Superman 64). Now say the foreigners ran that restaurant straight into the ground, fired the entire staff, and drove away all their customers while their own chain went through tough times and eventually out of business. Eventually they were forced to close the restaurant. A couple years later they opened up fast-food place at a mall food court with the same name and a crap generic menu and possibly a line of frozen food 'meals' based on recipes for that old restaurant (and their world famous turd sandwich)
That's what interplay is, it's just a name and a brand owned by a duo of incompetent French brothers who succeeded in not only going out of business in their first venture, but fired every single internal studio at Interplay, then the entire staff. That staff successfully sued for unpaid wages and Interplay closed shop or so it seemed. The Caens owned the name and avoided bankruptcy somehow.
Using the restaurant analogy again, they sold the rights to some other chain of restaurants who used the name and eventually hired a bunch of the original cooks. Meanwhile, they hired one of original waiters to be the manager of their food court place (Jason Anderson) who quit because he hated making turd sandwiches so they hired an original bus boy (Chris Taylor).
Do a little bit of research before venting like a fanboy. If you want to get technical, Interplay didn't give us Fallout. Brian Fargo and Black Isle Studios did. He left, they got fired and a few of them are at Obsidian. To call Interplay even a shadow of their former self would be a stretch, they aren't even worthy to be called that. It's more relevant to call them Titus because that's who runs it
Read the agreements, Interplay is screwed. The only reason they are fighting for their life is because literally they are fighting for their life. In the -100% chance they 'win' they can potentially get the now more lucrative (thanks to Bethesda) license back and royalties for FO3/NV. In the -%50% chance they get to keep making the MMO game, they at lest get to stay alive. In the 100% chance that they lose, they're going out of business. That's why they aren't going to give up even though they have no legal right.
One last thing, the internet seemed to have blown last month's comments from Bethesda way out of proportion when they said they only licensed the name. Even though this recently was considered irrelevant to the ongoing case, read the agreements. Bethesda has the right to approve anything that used the IP rights that they now own. That's what is meant. It's too bad there are these Interplay loyalists who have no idea they are being loyal to (a bunch of crooks) and these "bring back 2D isometric RPG!" geezers who are forever stuck in the mid-90s and for some reason siding with the Caens. I'm pretty sure that Bethesda's combined sales are multiples of the previous titles combined sales. You guys should check out the videos for Masthead's 'other' post-apocalyptic MMO game. If this is the engine FOOL is supposed to be running on, oh my lawds. Welcome back to 2002. LULZ!
-
So in your analogy Jason Anderson and Chris Taylor are nothing more than a waiter and a bus boy, as opposed to Obsidian's cooks? That's rather insulting to two of the people who created the original game.
Also, Brian Fargo did not work directly on Fallout. And Black Isle Studios was always a part of Interplay, not some independent entity.
-
It's you who has no idea what he's talking about. Chris Taylor was the lead designer for Fallout 1, while Jason Anderson was one of the three lead artists. Your are insulting to them, what's more, you're insulting AND patently false.
-
in 2002 you were still 12 and didn't want anything but Poke'mon or Dragonballl Z ......shut up lil kid, you don't know anything! LULZ!
-
i say just drop the lay suit and let interplay make the mmo, personaly i think its doomed because thousands of ppl will be playing on the same world and that would take to lonsome suvivour feel out of it witch to me is a major part of the game, let bethesda have all the consoul and pc games because in my opionin the make a better game. but like i said thats just my option.
-
@ AFGAN PSYCHO
You just like to argue I see, BOS for the Playstation 2 didn't get released until January 2004. Like i said before, Online games were the craze and almost any game on the ps2 looked like shit (Example: GTA San Andreas(PS2) compared to GTA 4(XBOX 360)) Some games needed a Xbox 360 or PS3 to reach their full potential, I'm not going to blame developers for that . I didn't care much for that BOS either , but I'm not arguing with you about BOS on PS2.
I'm done arguing with your dumbass over an opinion of a company, no matter what you say or do it doesn't change the fact that Interplay started it all. I don't care who has the rights to what or where or how or why. The Fallout you sit and play today is still the Fallout that Interplay created. The auto industry is a perfect example for me to shut you up. We all see Ads on TV and Newspapers for all these Shiny,Fancy ,New cars. So your favorite car company just happens to disappoint you cause their new car turns out to be a piece of shit. Just because its shiny and has a "new" smell to it doesn't mean its better. People didn't stop buying those pieces of shit, they just didn't buy as many. General motors and Ford started making quality cars again, now they run the world market in auto sales. Only difference between GM and Interplay is that Interplay didn't get a government bailout to revamp their company. I would buy an American car to support my local economy and yes I would buy a game to support my developers. I can't believe you brought up BOS on PS2 AfGHAN , you're getting desperate i see. Point being you can't please everyone no matter how much you'd like to, 1 bad game doesn't scare me away like you. Get better ammo AFGHAN!!! -
simply epic . epic Fight of Lawyers. they must do a MortalKombat versus StreetFighter thing . btw it is some MortalKombat reference in Fallout 2 .
still, i like the idea of getting a game based on the LawyersFight !
^__^
-
If Interplay created the series, why wouldn't be able to make an MMO based on their universe.
BTW, whenthey sold the license to Bethesda, doesn't that mean they sold them rights to make games based on the Fallout Universe and title, and not to OWN the series? Sorry, I'm a nubcake when it comes to courtroom drama.
-
I bet when this is all over Fallout Online is never going to be made just another fallout game that could'ev been good get CAND! just like all the other 5 fallout games!
-
@ AFGHAN PSYCHO
I still credit the person who created the "paper" in the 1st place. This "blank paper" wouldn't have existed to have your "lines" printed on. Bethesda turned Fallout into Oblivion with Guns and Nukes, same leveling system, Different Era. Nothing more. I give credit where credit is due, Brian Fargo and Interplay get that credit whether you like it or not. The game didn't fail the players, the players failed the game. Players were into online games at that time xbox,ps2,ect. No money.... no ideas... no development.... no new games. Think of Fallout as a soldier who lost his leg in a war, Bethesda is the fancy prosthetic leg he gets when going home. The soldier wasn't dying at all... Fallout "a pile of irradiated shit"? I think not. It's still the same Fallout I love, it just feels like Oblivion aswell. Fallout wasn't saved because of Bethesda, it was saved by becoming a console game. The fan base has always been there(since 1997), Bethesda was lucky being the highest bidder and they should worship Interplay for THEIR IDEAS and the fans that came with those ideas.
-
'Fallout "a pile of irradiated shit"? I think not. It's still the same Fallout I love, So you are stating that excuse for a game called BOS was still the same Fallout you loved. Also, yes the players failed the game, but due to common sense. Interplay failed because they released a fun concept gone bad. Of coarse the failed the game, because it was lacking in almost everything. Let me ask you this, would you buy a very bad game just to ensure that company will live on and continue to make more games based on the same concept? Because that is what they were going to do. If BOS had been sucessful, they would have continued the make BOS remakes. That was what Fallout was turning to. That's what I meant by an irradiated pile of shit. I wasn't inferring to 1 and 2 because they were actually great. However had BOS been sucessful, interplay would have continued to make sequels of BOS, hence irradiated pile of shit. Also Ausir, what you have said is correct, but other developers had no clue what soever to do with the franchise once obtained. Bethesda didn't have an idea either, but knew that they were going to build on the foundations of previous installments.
-
@ AFGHAN PSYCHO Final Fantasy Mystic Quest is a pile of shit but Square is just fine. Basically what you've pointed out is that people make mistakes. Good job. The mistake you've made here is claiming brash claims and now you don't know where to go with your argument.
-
Interplay started the franchise so I'm on their side, I've played every Fallout game that ever existed. It's their concepts and ideas that made every game. Bethedsa just supplied the new engine....they deserve only credit for that.
-
Do you still not realize that Fallout was turning into an irradiated pile of shit that no one wanted to touch? Bethesda made the franchise what it is today, a multi-million franchise whit great gameplay, exploration, and pretty good story line. A few argue that blah blah blah, Bethesda didn't do anything, if they hadn't picked it up, someone else would. This is absolutely not true. Do you know why Interplay sold it in the first place, because they didn't know what to do with the franchise, no one did, yet Bethesda still took the chance and was very sucessful. According to your analogy, that's like saying I invented paper for the first time and it was just blank paper, then another person bought the idea and lined the paper, making lined paper which was very profitable. Yes they didn't come up with the franchise, but they saved it.
-
"Fallout was turning into an irradiated pile of shit that no one wanted to touch? "
It wasn't. There were quite a few other bidders for the license.
"Do you know why Interplay sold it in the first place, because they didn't know what to do with the franchise, no one did,"
You're wrong. They sold it before they were forced to by being on the verge of bankrupcy.
-
irradiated pile of shit that no one wanted to touch is far from the right but it was far from being able to hold up to some games now adays. Bethesda did help the game alot they made it more open and a lot of fun. Bethesda did good work and im glad they had have it (i was like what the fuck when i herd they were geting it, cuz i thought it would suck).
-
@ Afghan
"Bethesda made the franchise what it is today, a multi-million franchise whit great gameplay, exploration, and pretty good story line"
While they made it lucrative by making it mainstream, Fallout has had great gameplay, exploration, and a good storyline since 1997
-
I don't know if this is the spot to put this, but couldn't they just make a temporary agreement or something to let both companies finish Van Buren, and label it as " a non-canon alternate fallout 3 from the past" or something like that?
-
Oh, wait. B I studies is gone... Couldn't somebody finish it though.
-
It can't be finished for similar reasons that Fallout Online may never be finished. The number of red flags that would come up would be insane. They could potentially finish the game, however it wouldn't be released 'till 2030 due to all the argueing over profits and who would take credit for the game. Plus the release of New Vegas (which uses elements from Van Buren) makes the release of it pointless.
-
I don't care either way. Both companies are just up to their usual corporate selfish shit, and even then I don't even care about the game.
-
"usual corporate selfish shit"
Otherwise known as Capitalism. If you don't expect people to do what they can to make money, you're welcome to talk to Marx.
-
@ Anon
Well, it depends on how much money they acctually need. Both are being pretty greedy with the whole franchise right now, and it's ruining it.
-
I know i'm anonymous, but the idea of an MMOG in any of the fallout styles scares me. My friend plays WoW and is always talking about "Balancing issues" and making all the classes "fair". I can only imagine the issues that would be caused by all the number values that would need to be changed. Seriously, in the midst of this debacle, New Vegas turned out to be one of the most unpolished games I have ever played. It did'nt even have to take into account foreign characters in the environment. I do enjoy the game, but an MMOG created like new vegas, apparently pieced together from different companies, seems almost a waste of time.
-
A singular company could put together a nice game if they were not plagued by legal troubles.
-
obsidian has always been known for the low level of polish intheir games they give you half a game but it's usually a great half a game
-
sorry about those typos
-
their is some bias, but it pretty stupid to not notice an old vault 13 clothed character, nuka cola, and supermutants.
-
is it just me, or did the wiki start looking completely idiotic?
-
And i mean like the background and everything
-
That's just you :P
-
how do i fix? :(
-
I don't care who wins,but very likely will not purchase FOOL. I can already tell that it will only be a cruel rehash of previous installments with new things. Also, how is it going to work out? I mean how is the thousands of people thing playing going to work out. I also think that this MMO will give Fallout a bad name, just look at Final Fantasy online. Also shady cakes, I agree with with you, the giant shrimp screen shot does look like something out of borderlands.
-
It's certainly not going to be a worse rehash than Fallout 3.
-
@ AFGHAN
A lot of people liked Final Fantasy XI, and that was an MMO. And just because Square Enix screwed up with XIV doesn't mean Interplay will
And cruel rehash? No, a cruel rehash would be purifying water by finding the GECK, while stopping the super mutants from dipping everyone in FEV, and stopping the Enclave from killing everyone with FEV. But, of course, that hasn't happened yet in a Fallout game, right?
-
ya what could possibly be worse than fo3 a critically aclaimed game that won several goty awards?
-
@ Anon
What could be worse than Fallout 3? A lot of things. What could be better? Fallout 1, a critically acclaimed game that won several GOTY awards AND constantly ranks on top 100 games of all time lists (and Fallout 2 and New Vegas, but I digress). But frankly, I don't go by awards when judging the quality of a game
Honestly though, I didn't think Fallout 3 was a bad game; I thought it was a bad Fallout game. On its own, it was alright, and it should have won those GOTY 2008 awards, although that's not saying much, given that its "stiff competition" was GTA IV, Gears of War 2, Call of Duty: World at War, and Rock Band 2
-
Anyone who considers GOTY awards as meritorous is a mindless consumer drones. GOTY awards are never awarded to games that are truly outstanding. GOTY and similiar game awards are a glorified popularity/dick contest.
-
Dude - it was Fallout that influenced Borderlands, not the other way around. Borderlands was basically an attempt to do a multiplayer capable Fallout-style game.
-
Sooo, New Vegas is dead then?
-
What does that have to do with this?
-
Everything. They let one game die, then squabble over who gets to make the next.
-
New Vegas is developed by Obsidian; this is developed by Interplay. That's two different companies running two different games
-
I think this whole thing is a little ridiculous. Why can't Bethesda just let it go? It's just an MMO that Interplay had the rights to make. Big deal. Also, why can't Interplay stop antagonizing Bethesda? They just sealed the deal by filing a counter-suit.
I mean, I haven't read the TLA they had agreed upon, but why are they both making such a big deal out of it?
-
Money. Lots of it. You could fill whole trucks with all the money that's on stake here..
-
Bethesda made fallout what it is, and they have the right to continue making great fallout games, but the brand, and most of the themes, that they use, were created by interplay, so they have every right to use them aswell.
-
Again, just observing, but isn't this entire news post bias due to it adding "But are they" after Bethesda's statement
-
just thinking that myself. it really isnt surprising. the whole sights biased to one guys opinion it seems anyway. thats the reason i'll never make an account.
-
No, I would not call my post biased. I simply pointed out a rather glaring inconsistency in Bethesda's statements. Personally, I support neither Bethesda nor Interplay, but I will gladly point out any false statements by both companies. Or do you not see the inconsistency in saying that they were not aware of Interplay using elements of the Fallout world, when they did see these proof of concept screenshots with super mutants and Nuka-Cola?
Hell, asking "but have they?" is actually biased in favor of Bethesda - maybe I should have written "but they haven't" instead.
-
if you just noticed this place is biased you must not be looking hard
-
What exactly is biased about my post? The fact that I pointed out the glaring inconsistency instead of ignoring it?
-
i didn't really mean this post, i meant in general, it's well known you don't like F3 and i can never remember you saying a nice thing about it or bethesda
-
I might be "biased" in my comments, but I try to be objective in my newsposts.
-
I never said bias toward bethesda, Ausir, I just said Bias. I think your opinion is your opinion and I have no problem with that. I was just pointing out that a NEWS POST had one sided commentary. Unless you wanted to be like FOX NEWS, I thought you may have done it unintentionally.
-
There is no commentary in the news post, just pointing out the facts, like the existence of the proof of concept screenshots.
-
Yeah... Ausir. It's a pretty slanted piece. If you don't want to admit it, that's chill. It's not like there's some Wiki Goon squad out there ready to pounce on anyone who admits that they can't write objectively but there's no reason why you can't act like there's one.
All we're saying is that no one believes you, even the people who agree with your slant (me).
-
Interplay needs to let it go, Bethesga is going to win even a blind man can see that
