Duck and Cover Forum Index


Use these links, buy stuff from Amazon and help us out, nubs. Link Translator
Amazon.com | Amazon.ca | Amazon.co.uk | Amazon.de | Fishpond.co.nz
  Duck and Cover  •  FAQ  •  Search  •  Memberlist  •  Usergroups   •  Register  •  Profile  •  Log in to check your private messages  •  Log in

 Support DAC!
 Bethesda get interrogative! View next topic
View previous topic
Post new topicReply to topic
Author Message
King of Creation
Righteous Subjugator
Righteous Subjugator


Joined: 20 Dec 2003
Posts: 5101

PostPosted: Sat Nov 14, 2009 7:09 am Reply with quoteBack to top

[ Company -> Update ] - More info on Company: Bethesda v. Interplay

Bethesda has just filed a document with the courts (which DAC has obtained) regarding their first set of "interroratories" to Interplay. It's quite a lengthy list, but very interesting to read. Here's the meat of the filing:

INTERROGATORY NO. 1:
Identify each person, other than a person intended to be called as an expert witness at the Preliminary Injunction hearing, having discoverable information and state the subject matter of the information possessed by that person.
INTERROGATORY NO. 2:
Identify each person whom you expect to call as an expert witness at the Preliminary Injunction hearing, state the subject matter on which the expert is expected to testify, state the substance of the findings and opinions to which the expert is expected to testify and a summary of the grounds for each opinion, and, with respect to an expert whose findings and opinions were acquired in anticipation of litigation or for trial, summarize the qualifications of the expert, state the terms of the expert’s compensation, and attach to your answers any available list of publications written by the expert and any written report made by the expert concerning the expert’s findings and opinions.
INTERROGATORY NO. 3:
Identify all steps taken by Interplay, prior to April 4, 2009, to “secure[ ] financing for the
FALLOUT MMOG in an amount no less than US$30,000,000.”
INTERROGATORY NO. 4:
Identify any and all facts that support your contention that Interplay “substantially satisfied” the “minimum financing” requirement of the TLA on or prior to April 4, 2009.
INTERROGATORY NO. 5:
Identify all steps taken by Interplay, prior to April 4, 2009, to commence “full-scale development of the FALLOUT MMOG.”
INTERROGATORY NO. 6:
Identify any and all facts that support your contention that Interplay “substantially satisfied” the “full-scale development” requirement of the TLA on or prior to April 4, 2009.
INTERROGATORY NO. 7:
Identify all work performed by Interplay on the Fallout MMOG prior to April 4, 2009, including, but not limited to: identifying all Interplay personnel working on the Fallout MMOG and the nature of work they performed; identifying all non-Interplay companies and personnel working on the Fallout MMOG and the nature of work they performed; identifying all agreements with any third parties related to the Fallout MMOG; and describing all activities related to designing, coding, rendering and otherwise developing the Fallout MMOG.
INTERROGATORY NO. 8:
If you contend that “Project V13” is not the Fallout MMOG contemplated by the TLA, identify all work performed by Interplay on the “Project V13” MMOG prior to April 4, 2009, including, but not limited to: identifying all Interplay personnel working on the “Project V13” MMOG and the nature of work they performed; identifying all non-Interplay companies and personnel working on the “Project V13” MMOG and the nature of work they performed; identifying all agreements with any third parties related to the “Project V13” MMOG; and describing all activities related to designing, coding, rendering and otherwise developing the “Project V13” MMOG.
INTERROGATORY NO. 9:
Describe the concept of the “Project V13” MMOG and/or any MMOG currently under development by Interplay, including major characters, storylines, and background.
INTERROGATORY NO. 10:
If you contend that “Project V13” is not the Fallout MMOG contemplated by the TLA, describe the concept of the Fallout MMOG, including major characters, storylines, and background.
INTERROGATORY NO. 11:
Identify how much money you had spent on developing the Fallout MMOG prior to April 4, 2009.
INTERROGATORY NO. 12:
Identify how much money you had spent on developing the “Project V13” MMOG prior to April 4, 2009.
INTERROGATORY NO. 13:
Identify all compilations and collections of the Pre-existing Fallout Games, including but not limited to “Fallout Trilogy,” “Fallout Collection,” and “Saga Fallout,” and the dates of first sale of each collection, separately for boxed and digital formats.
INTERROGATORY NO. 14:
Identify the first date of sale of “Fallout Trilogy.”
INTERROGATORY NO. 15:
Identify and describe in detail any new content, asset or feature that has been included in any copy for sale of any of the Pre-existing Fallout Games, individually or in collections, in boxed or digital formats, since April 4, 2007.
INTERROGATORY NO. 16:
Identify all third parties who manufacture, distribute, and/or sell the Pre-existing Fallout Games under contractual arrangements with Interplay, whether individually or in collections, whether in boxed or digital formats, and for each third party identified, state the relevant time period during which it manufactured, distributed and/or sold the Pre-existing Fallout Games and identify which of the Pre-existing Fallout Games each third party manufactured, distributed and/or sold.
INTERROGATORY NO. 17:
Identify and describe any information supporting your contention that an assignment is different from a sublicense.
INTERROGATORY NO. 18:
Describe your efforts to obtain approval from Bethesda regarding sublicenses to third parties.
INTERROGATORY NO. 19:
Describe your efforts to obtain approval from Bethesda regarding promotional materials for the Pre-existing Fallout Games.
INTERROGATORY NO. 20:
Identify and describe any and all communications evidencing consumer confusion, including any complaints Interplay has received from customers regarding the contents of “Fallout Trilogy” or any other compilation of the Pre-existing Fallout Games.
INTERROGATORY NO. 21:
Identify all efforts to sell the Fallout intellectual property from January 1, 2001 to the present.
INTERROGATORY NO. 22:
Identify all projects currently being developed by Interplay.

If Interplay answers all of these requests, then DAC will probably be able to get some substantial information about PV13 once (and if) these answers appear in court.

Bethesda isn't finished making demands yet, though. In addition to the list of interroratories, Bethesda has made a list of requested admissions. Basically, they want Interplay to admit to a whole bunch of things. I forsee this being a "uh huh!" "nuh uh!" "uh huh!" "nuh uh!" proceeding.

REQUEST NO. 1:
Admit that Interplay received from Bethesda $1,175,000 for the Exclusive License Agreement executed on June 29, 2004.
REQUEST NO. 2:
Admit that Interplay received from Bethesda the total amount of $5,750,000 in three installments under the APA executed on April 4, 2007.
REQUEST NO. 3:
Admit that Interplay did not commence “full-scale development of its FALLOUT MMOG” on or before April 4, 2009.
REQUEST NO. 4:
Admit that, in 2009, Interplay did not have the internal resources required to commence full-scale development of the Fallout MMOG.
REQUEST NO. 5:
Admit that Interplay had not “secured financing for the FALLOUT MMOG in an amount no less than US $30,000,000” on or before April 4, 2009.
REQUEST NO. 6:
Admit that Interplay did not have or hold US $30,000,000 in its own account(s) as of April 4, 2009.
REQUEST NO. 7:
Admit that Interplay did not have or hold US $30,000,000 in its own account(s) at any time in 2009.
REQUEST NO. 8:
Admit that Interplay did not have access to US $30,000,000 in financing for the FALLOUT MMOG on or before April 4, 2009.
REQUEST NO. 9:
Admit that Interplay did not secure a binding commitment from any lender, financial institution or any other third party, including Masthead Studios, for US $30,000,000 in financing for the FALLOUT MMOG on or before April 4, 2009.
REQUEST NO. 10: Admit that the first sale of “Fallout Trilogy” occurred after the execution of the APA on April 4, 2007.
REQUEST NO. 11: Admit that the first sale of “Fallout Trilogy” occurred in 2009.
REQUEST NO. 12: Admit that the first sale of “Fallout Trilogy” occurred in April 2009.
REQUEST NO. 13: Admit that Interplay did not submit to Bethesda any packaging, advertising or promotional material for “Fallout Trilogy” prior to its sale and distribution.
REQUEST NO. 14: Admit that Interplay has an agreement with Good Old Games to distribute and sell the Pre-existing Fallout Games.
REQUEST NO. 15: Admit that Interplay did not seek approval from Bethesda prior to entering into its an agreement with Good Old Games to distribute and sell the Pre-existing Fallout Games.
REQUEST NO. 16: Admit that Interplay has an agreement with GameTap to distribute and sell the Pre-existing Fallout Games.
REQUEST NO. 17: Admit that Interplay did not seek approval from Bethesda prior to entering into its an agreement with GameTap to distribute and sell the Pre-existing Fallout Games.
REQUEST NO. 18: Admit that Interplay has an agreement with Valve Corporation to distribute and sell the Pre-existing Fallout Games.
REQUEST NO. 19: Admit that Interplay did not seek approval from Bethesda prior to entering into its an agreement with Valve Corporation to distribute and sell the Pre-existing Fallout Games.
REQUEST NO. 20: Admit that the current contents of one or more of the Pre-existing Fallout Games are not identical to the contents of the Pre-existing Fallout Games prior to April 4, 2007.
REQUEST NO. 21: Admit that you have received communications from customers evidencing confusion between “Fallout Trilogy” and “Fallout 3.”
REQUEST NO. 22: Admit that Interplay’s filings with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (“SEC”) are complete and accurate.

And last but not least, more money trouble for Interplay? From Frymuchan at the Raging Bull Forums:

Interplay filed an extension today to delay filing their latest quarterly.

That could really mean anything, but it's my theory that they're requesting an extension just so Bethesda doesn't have more ammunition to use in court.


View user's profileSend private messageVisit poster's website
VasikkA
No more Tuna
No more Tuna


Joined: 15 Jun 2002
Posts: 8717

PostPosted: Sat Nov 14, 2009 9:59 am Reply with quoteBack to top

Bethesda's success can be attributed to ZeniMax's law department, not to their ability to make RPG's.

Besides, those questions are irrelevant as Herve operates outside the realm of law.
View user's profileSend private message
jetbaby
Mamma's Gang member
Mamma's Gang member


Joined: 18 Jan 2004
Posts: 4190
Location: Magical Island

PostPosted: Sat Nov 14, 2009 9:08 pm Reply with quoteBack to top

He IS the law.
View user's profileSend private message
The-Barron
The Unlucky SDF!
The Unlucky SDF!


Joined: 13 Nov 2009
Posts: 13

PostPosted: Wed Nov 18, 2009 5:32 am Reply with quoteBack to top

Interplay always files late. Nothing out of the ordinary here.
I want to see Interplays demands when the court posts them.

Request 1 . Admit your parent company formed an online division 4 months after the contract and started work on Fallout Online

Request 2. Admit you denied Interplay the ability to advertise and promote fallout online and did your best to stop them from securing the 30 million.

Request 3. Admit you practiced gamesmanship and tried to sabotage interplays efforts.

Request 4. Admit its really going to suck if you lose the case and owe royalites on copies sold of fallout 3.

Request 5. Admit its going to rock to see a REAL fallout 3 be made.
View user's profileSend private message
Ausir
The Vault Overseer
The Vault Overseer


Joined: 22 Apr 2002
Posts: 1272
Location: Poland

PostPosted: Wed Nov 18, 2009 12:47 pm Reply with quoteBack to top

Quote:
Request 5. Admit its going to rock to see a REAL fallout 3 be made.


The real Fallout 3 was canceled in 2003 by Herve Caen.
View user's profileSend private messageVisit poster's websiteAIM AddressYahoo MessengerMSN MessengerICQ Number
Dr.Xen
Vault Dweller
Vault Dweller


Joined: 18 Nov 2009
Posts: 117
Location: Shenzhen

PostPosted: Wed Nov 18, 2009 2:45 pm Reply with quoteBack to top

Is there any possibility that the Van Buren can back on table?
View user's profileSend private messageVisit poster's websiteICQ Number
Stainless
Living Legend
Living Legend


Joined: 18 Apr 2002
Posts: 3033
Location: Melbourne, Futureland

PostPosted: Wed Nov 18, 2009 2:47 pm Reply with quoteBack to top

I seriously doubt it.
View user's profileSend private messageSend e-mailICQ Number
King of Creation
Righteous Subjugator
Righteous Subjugator


Joined: 20 Dec 2003
Posts: 5101

PostPosted: Wed Nov 18, 2009 3:05 pm Reply with quoteBack to top

Dr.Xen wrote:
Is there any possibility that the Van Buren can back on table?


Story-wise, there's no real reason why not. But from a technical standpoint, a lot has happened since Van Buren was in development. Whoever wanted to make Van Buren now would have to start from scratch with a spiffy graphics engine in order to get by any normal marketing department.
View user's profileSend private messageVisit poster's website
Dr.Xen
Vault Dweller
Vault Dweller


Joined: 18 Nov 2009
Posts: 117
Location: Shenzhen

PostPosted: Wed Nov 18, 2009 3:41 pm Reply with quoteBack to top

Well, that put the story of VB in a really awkward position, 'cause not all of them will be admitted by Beth, but how do we know which will?
View user's profileSend private messageVisit poster's websiteICQ Number
Display posts from previous:      
Post new topicReply to topic


Jump to:  



View next topic
View previous topic
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum


Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group