Zenimax Sues Oculus(zenimax.com)
zenimax.com
Zenimax Sues Oculus
http://www.zenimax.com/press/ZeniMax_Media_Inc._and_id_Software_LLC_File_Suite_Against_Oculus_VR_Inc._and_its_Founder_Palmer_Luckey
97 comments
[deleted](1)
What a shortsighted move. Who would want to work for Zenimax after this? Whatever Zenimax gets out of this lawsuit will be overshadowed by the goodwill they've lost.
EDIT: Who would want to work someplace that will aggressively assert rights over your personal projects?
Let's assume Carmack happened to work on VR within a Zenimax office. We're talking about someone who created Armadillo Aerospace. If Carmack felt like developing VR outside of Zenimax offices, he obviously could have. So it must be true that Zenimax didn't actually help VR in any substantial way. Carmack's VR development just happened to take place within a Zenimax building. And now they're going after him for it, while playing it off like VR wouldn't have existed without Zenimax's contributions.
EDIT2: What convinced me was a thought experiment: imagine Zenimax without Carmack. Now think of all the ways that our imaginary entity could possibly contribute to the development of VR. At best, our entity provided a building for Carmack to pursue his personal interests in (a "mad scientist lab," as the Complaint calls it). Maybe some marketing, but who would deny that the hype would have rolled in regardless of whatever Zenimax did to help it along? Two seconds looking through a Rift is enough to transform anyone into an evangelist. The VR ball began rolling due to the efforts of Carmack, not Zenimax.
So, let's say you're Zenimax. You have Carmack working for you, working on all kinds of cool projects; whatever interests him. Choose your adventure:
- Stand to benefit by the halo effect of having a living legend on your payroll; a legend who gets the entire gamedev industry interested in projects happening at your company. Attract top talent by virtue of the buzz, and a creative's natural desire to be a part of cool projects. Your new top talent goes on to create many millions of dollars of value for your company.
- Try to assert control over whatever Carmack makes. Make it abundantly clear that no personal projects will be tolerated by any employee on Zenimax's payroll. Show the world that no one can work for you unless their sole ambition is to be a Zenimax employee. Convince every young hotshot college grad that it's a bad idea to go work for you. Lose whatever momentum you would have gained by attracting top talent.
EDIT: Who would want to work someplace that will aggressively assert rights over your personal projects?
Let's assume Carmack happened to work on VR within a Zenimax office. We're talking about someone who created Armadillo Aerospace. If Carmack felt like developing VR outside of Zenimax offices, he obviously could have. So it must be true that Zenimax didn't actually help VR in any substantial way. Carmack's VR development just happened to take place within a Zenimax building. And now they're going after him for it, while playing it off like VR wouldn't have existed without Zenimax's contributions.
EDIT2: What convinced me was a thought experiment: imagine Zenimax without Carmack. Now think of all the ways that our imaginary entity could possibly contribute to the development of VR. At best, our entity provided a building for Carmack to pursue his personal interests in (a "mad scientist lab," as the Complaint calls it). Maybe some marketing, but who would deny that the hype would have rolled in regardless of whatever Zenimax did to help it along? Two seconds looking through a Rift is enough to transform anyone into an evangelist. The VR ball began rolling due to the efforts of Carmack, not Zenimax.
So, let's say you're Zenimax. You have Carmack working for you, working on all kinds of cool projects; whatever interests him. Choose your adventure:
- Stand to benefit by the halo effect of having a living legend on your payroll; a legend who gets the entire gamedev industry interested in projects happening at your company. Attract top talent by virtue of the buzz, and a creative's natural desire to be a part of cool projects. Your new top talent goes on to create many millions of dollars of value for your company.
- Try to assert control over whatever Carmack makes. Make it abundantly clear that no personal projects will be tolerated by any employee on Zenimax's payroll. Show the world that no one can work for you unless their sole ambition is to be a Zenimax employee. Convince every young hotshot college grad that it's a bad idea to go work for you. Lose whatever momentum you would have gained by attracting top talent.
I would.
I don't understand why you're so surprised that a company sued after they were turned down for a settlement from a company they gave a bunch of key technology to under an agreement.
I don't find that behavior to be unreasonable at all.
I don't understand why you're so surprised that a company sued after they were turned down for a settlement from a company they gave a bunch of key technology to under an agreement.
I don't find that behavior to be unreasonable at all.
Let's be frank, there are at at least 3 degrees of separation between what Oculus 'got' and ZeniMax. It was completely based on John Carmacs enthusiasm for VR, and the time that he invested in getting Doom3 to work with it, among his other experiments, that there is any relationship between Oculus and ZeniMax. He also pushed for Doom3 to be open sourced, and many other things. ZeniMax can not control him, but unfortunately they do control a company that Carmac also had enthusiasm for, and all the IP John Carmac created when ZeniMax wasn't even around.
Their behavior is not unreasonable, but it is only possible because a prolific developer was not concerned about nuances of copyright law while collaborating with multiple companies.
That kind of behavior does cost goodwill, and although you might not mind working for ZeniMax, SCO, Oracle, I think the original point stands, and a few people might mind.
Their behavior is not unreasonable, but it is only possible because a prolific developer was not concerned about nuances of copyright law while collaborating with multiple companies.
That kind of behavior does cost goodwill, and although you might not mind working for ZeniMax, SCO, Oracle, I think the original point stands, and a few people might mind.
> Their behavior is not unreasonable, but it is only possible because a prolific developer was not concerned about nuances of copyright law while collaborating with multiple companies.
I expect that Facebook is going to tell Oculus to suck it up, pay a settlement, and everyone will go home and move on with their lives.
Carmac worked on Oculus at id's office, during work hours, using id resources. Oculus promoted their product using id games. At every step, id (and hence ZeniMax) provided technical assistance.
Oculus didn't want to pay for it by reaching a deal as they moved forward to commercializing, so now they're going to reach one as part of a settlement resolving a lawsuit.
Really, this doesn't strike me as a particularly bad case, and reading their lawsuit filing, not inappropriate for them to file a lawsuit after failing to have a settlement reached with Oculus to pay for the technology.
(As an aside, there is other IP than just copyright involved.)
I expect that Facebook is going to tell Oculus to suck it up, pay a settlement, and everyone will go home and move on with their lives.
Carmac worked on Oculus at id's office, during work hours, using id resources. Oculus promoted their product using id games. At every step, id (and hence ZeniMax) provided technical assistance.
Oculus didn't want to pay for it by reaching a deal as they moved forward to commercializing, so now they're going to reach one as part of a settlement resolving a lawsuit.
Really, this doesn't strike me as a particularly bad case, and reading their lawsuit filing, not inappropriate for them to file a lawsuit after failing to have a settlement reached with Oculus to pay for the technology.
(As an aside, there is other IP than just copyright involved.)
So, there's a whole host of problems with this line of reasoning.
What we do as engineers, especially in software development, shouldn't be treated with the same reasoning as you'd seen in an assembly line.
First, note that Carmack was a cofounder of id; a good chunk of his precedent and history was doing exactly this sort of research work. Does Zenimax want to go back and claim ownership of his contributions to graphics cards manufacturers for his help with their drivers and APIs?
Second, note that at a high level, it simply doesn't make sense to have an engineer not working on R&D in fields outside of what the current core line of business is. Especially in a AAA studio, a lot of that work is either art or scripting or quashing bugs--a workload which is honestly a total waste of senior engineer talent. They enjoyed the fruits of this labor; consider the extra sales of Doom 3 BFG whose improvements were driven partially by this work with Oculus.
Third, Zenimax wasn't and isn't in the business of making hardware, and only now seemed to give a shit following the Facebook acquisition. This is so transparently a cash-grab that I'm kind of surprised you are being generous at all on this.
~
Look, I don't know about you, but I'd rather not live in a world where my employer effectively owns everything I do while drawing a salary there, and can make a claim on everything I work on hence, regardless of whether it makes any logical sense or not.
Further, I don't think it's good that you can spend twenty years building a business (industry, more honestly) and then have some asshole suits screw you out of what should by right be a fun working semi-retirement. It's like spitting in the face of engineering's American Dream.
What we do as engineers, especially in software development, shouldn't be treated with the same reasoning as you'd seen in an assembly line.
First, note that Carmack was a cofounder of id; a good chunk of his precedent and history was doing exactly this sort of research work. Does Zenimax want to go back and claim ownership of his contributions to graphics cards manufacturers for his help with their drivers and APIs?
Second, note that at a high level, it simply doesn't make sense to have an engineer not working on R&D in fields outside of what the current core line of business is. Especially in a AAA studio, a lot of that work is either art or scripting or quashing bugs--a workload which is honestly a total waste of senior engineer talent. They enjoyed the fruits of this labor; consider the extra sales of Doom 3 BFG whose improvements were driven partially by this work with Oculus.
Third, Zenimax wasn't and isn't in the business of making hardware, and only now seemed to give a shit following the Facebook acquisition. This is so transparently a cash-grab that I'm kind of surprised you are being generous at all on this.
~
Look, I don't know about you, but I'd rather not live in a world where my employer effectively owns everything I do while drawing a salary there, and can make a claim on everything I work on hence, regardless of whether it makes any logical sense or not.
Further, I don't think it's good that you can spend twenty years building a business (industry, more honestly) and then have some asshole suits screw you out of what should by right be a fun working semi-retirement. It's like spitting in the face of engineering's American Dream.
ZeniMax was working on VR technologies before Carmack began interacting with Oculus, and has a reasonable claim to the fruits of his work on that (being that it was an assigned R&D project).
Do you really think I should (for example) be allowed to develop a new plastic in an R&D position as part of my duties at a chemical company, and then simply give the research over to a competitor because it strikes my fancy?
If Carmack wanted to retain control over his IP, or not work under the (pretty reasonable) IP assignment clause, he should have not sold the company or not stayed working there.
The fact is ZeniMax has several good claims: Oculus used id IP to promote their product (games), used products of id's (under ZeniMax) research in to VR, and so on.
Do you really think I should (for example) be allowed to develop a new plastic in an R&D position as part of my duties at a chemical company, and then simply give the research over to a competitor because it strikes my fancy?
If Carmack wanted to retain control over his IP, or not work under the (pretty reasonable) IP assignment clause, he should have not sold the company or not stayed working there.
The fact is ZeniMax has several good claims: Oculus used id IP to promote their product (games), used products of id's (under ZeniMax) research in to VR, and so on.
First, note that Carmack was a cofounder of id; a good chunk of his precedent and history was doing exactly this sort of research work.
Which was (part of) the portfolio Zenimax was buying into when they acquired id. Zenimax spent about $105 million on that deal, of which Carmack presumably received a large chunk as a co-owner of the company. They put down fat money to own id and the IP that came out there.
Further, I don't think it's good that you can spend twenty years building a business (industry, more honestly) and then have some asshole suits screw you out of what should by right be a fun working semi-retirement. It's like spitting in the face of engineering's American Dream.
How are they screwing him? He could have just quit ID and gone to work on Oculus once he decided that that was the most exciting thing, it's not like he was depending on a biweekly paycheck from Zenimax to keep a roof over his head and put diapers on the baby. Nobody forced him to sell id to ZeniMax, I presume he and his partners did so because they all got very rich in the process.
Which was (part of) the portfolio Zenimax was buying into when they acquired id. Zenimax spent about $105 million on that deal, of which Carmack presumably received a large chunk as a co-owner of the company. They put down fat money to own id and the IP that came out there.
Further, I don't think it's good that you can spend twenty years building a business (industry, more honestly) and then have some asshole suits screw you out of what should by right be a fun working semi-retirement. It's like spitting in the face of engineering's American Dream.
How are they screwing him? He could have just quit ID and gone to work on Oculus once he decided that that was the most exciting thing, it's not like he was depending on a biweekly paycheck from Zenimax to keep a roof over his head and put diapers on the baby. Nobody forced him to sell id to ZeniMax, I presume he and his partners did so because they all got very rich in the process.
>Carmac worked on Oculus at id's office, during work hours, using id resources. Oculus promoted their product using id games. At every step, id (and hence ZeniMax) provided technical assistance.
He also worked from home, on weekends, and from hotel, when he wants to be uninterrupted. Who knows if he billed (his own, historically) company for that? The point is, he really didn't have to, and ZeniMax is playing a 'gotcha' game.
>Really, this doesn't strike me as a particularly bad case, and reading their lawsuit filing, not inappropriate for them to file a lawsuit after failing to have a settlement reached with Oculus to pay for the technology.
I agree, they probably have a decent case, but it's not any less sad to see.
He also worked from home, on weekends, and from hotel, when he wants to be uninterrupted. Who knows if he billed (his own, historically) company for that? The point is, he really didn't have to, and ZeniMax is playing a 'gotcha' game.
>Really, this doesn't strike me as a particularly bad case, and reading their lawsuit filing, not inappropriate for them to file a lawsuit after failing to have a settlement reached with Oculus to pay for the technology.
I agree, they probably have a decent case, but it's not any less sad to see.
> He also worked from home, on weekends, and from hotel, when he wants to be uninterrupted. Who knows if he billed (his own, historically) company for that? The point is, he really didn't have to, and ZeniMax is playing a 'gotcha' game.
Not true. See my previous question and discussion on this topic at the link below. If you sign a contract with a large company which has a clause that they own ip you create while working for them belongs to them (which is very common), you are out of luck.
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=7589822
Not true. See my previous question and discussion on this topic at the link below. If you sign a contract with a large company which has a clause that they own ip you create while working for them belongs to them (which is very common), you are out of luck.
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=7589822
You are indeed out of luck if you sign such a contract, which is why it's so important to refuse to sign any such contract. If you're hard up for money (been there), it might seem crazy to risk not getting a job by complaining about the contract you're about to sign, but trust me, the employers are usually more than happy to carve out a clause for you. They want you working for them more than they want to assert dominance over you.
See my other reply for page cites and details, but it seems that ZeniMax was actively pursuing VR technology and that Carmac was part of that project prior to his work on Oculus.
If I work for money developing a certain kind of technology, it's reasonable for my employer to think I won't give my work project over to another company and that they have some claim to that technology.
If I work for money developing a certain kind of technology, it's reasonable for my employer to think I won't give my work project over to another company and that they have some claim to that technology.
Well, this is the first I hear of ZeniMax actively pursuing VR. I'm curious to know what you're basing this on. From what John Carmac said, he has personally been interested in VR since 90s, not ZeniMax.
The thing is, we can't talk legalese and English at the same time. By law, ZeniMax might own everything and its history, if they own 51% of it. But by causality, they might have played no part in its creation. This is why they might have a legal case, (unless they did, in fact, instigated VR R&D, as opposed to just buy share of [id]) but they don't have my goodwill.
The thing is, we can't talk legalese and English at the same time. By law, ZeniMax might own everything and its history, if they own 51% of it. But by causality, they might have played no part in its creation. This is why they might have a legal case, (unless they did, in fact, instigated VR R&D, as opposed to just buy share of [id]) but they don't have my goodwill.
"I would."
Then you're a sellout, and an enemy of labor. Enjoy your pieces of silver.
Had the tech come from a line employee, maybe--but it came from somebody with a long history of helping others in the community, of developing technology as a default idle process, and who basically invented the field.
That you'd honor Zenimax's position here is very unfortunate, least of all because you'd be supporting the position that anything you do while employed belongs to your employer, especially after a precedent is set to the contrary.
I'm not shocked that Zenimax is suing, because they're a bunch of money-grubbing assholes and probably sad they missed out on the cash from the Facebook acquisition. That said, I don't pretend for a minute that what they're doing is anything other than that: being money-grubbing assholes.
Then you're a sellout, and an enemy of labor. Enjoy your pieces of silver.
Had the tech come from a line employee, maybe--but it came from somebody with a long history of helping others in the community, of developing technology as a default idle process, and who basically invented the field.
That you'd honor Zenimax's position here is very unfortunate, least of all because you'd be supporting the position that anything you do while employed belongs to your employer, especially after a precedent is set to the contrary.
I'm not shocked that Zenimax is suing, because they're a bunch of money-grubbing assholes and probably sad they missed out on the cash from the Facebook acquisition. That said, I don't pretend for a minute that what they're doing is anything other than that: being money-grubbing assholes.
According to the lawsuit filing (page 8 of the PDF linked above), Carmac was researching VR at id under ZeniMax.
So yes, I think projects you undertake at work for money belong to your employer, and that this is a reasonable standard.
> least of all because you'd be supporting the position that anything you do while employed belongs to your employer
My position is that work you do for hire belongs to the person paying, not anything to do with side projects.
> 25. In 2011, ZeniMax actively pursued that research, including experiments with various off-the-shelf headsets. However, none provided an experience sufficiently immersive and responsive to be commercially successful. A significant limitation was “latency” – the delay between a user’s movement and the corresponding change in the displayed image.
> 26. By 2012, ZeniMax employees, including Carmack, had amassed valuable and confidential know-how and trade secret information about how to develop, combine, and optimize hardware, firmware, and software for an improved and competitively advantageous virtual reality experience (the “VR Technology”).
> 27. ZeniMax planned to demonstrate its VR Technology at the E3 Convention in June 2012, using one of its leading brands, “DOOM 3: BFG Edition.” On or about March 7, 2012 – a month before ZeniMax obtained a prototype Rift or had any contact with Luckey – id Software’s Creative Director tested a virtual reality headset in ZeniMax’s offices using ZeniMax’s VR Technology, as shown in this photograph posted online by id Software at that time: [Photo Omitted in Quote]
(Pages 9-10 of lawsuit PDF)
As can be seen, ZeniMax was actively pursuing VR outside of Carmac's work with Oculus, and hence his work on the Oculus project would fall under rather reasonable IP assignments - see the inserted image of the contract clause from page 8 of the lawsuit.
So yes, I think projects you undertake at work for money belong to your employer, and that this is a reasonable standard.
> least of all because you'd be supporting the position that anything you do while employed belongs to your employer
My position is that work you do for hire belongs to the person paying, not anything to do with side projects.
> 25. In 2011, ZeniMax actively pursued that research, including experiments with various off-the-shelf headsets. However, none provided an experience sufficiently immersive and responsive to be commercially successful. A significant limitation was “latency” – the delay between a user’s movement and the corresponding change in the displayed image.
> 26. By 2012, ZeniMax employees, including Carmack, had amassed valuable and confidential know-how and trade secret information about how to develop, combine, and optimize hardware, firmware, and software for an improved and competitively advantageous virtual reality experience (the “VR Technology”).
> 27. ZeniMax planned to demonstrate its VR Technology at the E3 Convention in June 2012, using one of its leading brands, “DOOM 3: BFG Edition.” On or about March 7, 2012 – a month before ZeniMax obtained a prototype Rift or had any contact with Luckey – id Software’s Creative Director tested a virtual reality headset in ZeniMax’s offices using ZeniMax’s VR Technology, as shown in this photograph posted online by id Software at that time: [Photo Omitted in Quote]
(Pages 9-10 of lawsuit PDF)
As can be seen, ZeniMax was actively pursuing VR outside of Carmac's work with Oculus, and hence his work on the Oculus project would fall under rather reasonable IP assignments - see the inserted image of the contract clause from page 8 of the lawsuit.
So, your examples show an issue that recurs elsewhere in that document:
> 45. Luckey used ZeniMax’s VR Technology that he acquired through the FTP site and otherwise to create and promote the modified Rift headset.
> 46. Around the same time, ZeniMax also sent cables and customized sensors to Luckey and disclosed – pursuant to the Non-Disclosure Agreement – additional hardware design improvements regarding optics calibration and sensor mounting.
I keep seeing Zenimax used (presumably) in place of Carmack--probably because their arrangement was more "let the father of desktop gaming graphics do whatever he wants", and it looks really good in this filing if it isn't him but Zenimax and Zenimax employees.
My issue with your excerpt of 26 is that how to "developm combine, and optimize hardware, firmware, and software...for virtual reality" is a completely broad description which can apply to any sort of 3D work whatsoever. It sounds impressive as hell, sure, but the fact is that tweaking a shader on Ogre3D would fall under that category. It's stupidly broad.
By conveniently switching around when they refer to what--in other words, by being lawyers--they manage to sound really damning when pretty much anything would fall under their claimed work.
> 45. Luckey used ZeniMax’s VR Technology that he acquired through the FTP site and otherwise to create and promote the modified Rift headset.
> 46. Around the same time, ZeniMax also sent cables and customized sensors to Luckey and disclosed – pursuant to the Non-Disclosure Agreement – additional hardware design improvements regarding optics calibration and sensor mounting.
I keep seeing Zenimax used (presumably) in place of Carmack--probably because their arrangement was more "let the father of desktop gaming graphics do whatever he wants", and it looks really good in this filing if it isn't him but Zenimax and Zenimax employees.
My issue with your excerpt of 26 is that how to "developm combine, and optimize hardware, firmware, and software...for virtual reality" is a completely broad description which can apply to any sort of 3D work whatsoever. It sounds impressive as hell, sure, but the fact is that tweaking a shader on Ogre3D would fall under that category. It's stupidly broad.
By conveniently switching around when they refer to what--in other words, by being lawyers--they manage to sound really damning when pretty much anything would fall under their claimed work.
The point of my quotation is merely to show that as part of work activities, research on VR was being done at id (ZeniMax) prior to contact with Oculus, and that Carmack's work on the subject would thus fall under the IP assignment clause from page 8.
Do you disagree with that analysis?
Do you disagree with that analysis?
> anything you do while employed belongs to your employer
have you ever signed a software engineering contract? surrender of IP created at work or working for the company is _very_ standard.
have you ever signed a software engineering contract? surrender of IP created at work or working for the company is _very_ standard.
[deleted](1)
The same people who won't buy EA games. Oh -
http://www.zacks.com/commentary/32628/bull-of-the-day-electr... "The stock has been an all-star performer over the past two years, as EA has appreciated by nearly 150% in the time frame."
Gamers don't care.
http://www.zacks.com/commentary/32628/bull-of-the-day-electr... "The stock has been an all-star performer over the past two years, as EA has appreciated by nearly 150% in the time frame."
Gamers don't care.
I agree that gamers mostly don't care, but referencing the stock doesn't support your argument.
First of all, most stocks have appreciated significantly, the stock market is at all time highs.
Second, EA sales do not correlate to the stock price increase, nor do profits (you can wait for the stock crash accordingly). Their PE ratio is basically between off the charts and negative. Their sales haven't increased in six years: they did $4 billion in sales in fiscal 2008, they did $3.8 billion in fiscal 2013.
Why is it up so much? Because investors are frequently irrational, sentiment tends to go to extremes.
First of all, most stocks have appreciated significantly, the stock market is at all time highs.
Second, EA sales do not correlate to the stock price increase, nor do profits (you can wait for the stock crash accordingly). Their PE ratio is basically between off the charts and negative. Their sales haven't increased in six years: they did $4 billion in sales in fiscal 2008, they did $3.8 billion in fiscal 2013.
Why is it up so much? Because investors are frequently irrational, sentiment tends to go to extremes.
Remind me not to sign any contracts with you, because you're just too cool for that sort of thing.
If Carmack felt like developing VR outside of Zenimax offices, he obviously could have. So it must be true that Zenimax didn't actually help VR in any substantial way. Carmack's VR development just happened to take place within a Zenimax building.
He had a contractual exemption for Armadillo. His development 'just happened' to take place inside a Zenimax building, ie the workplace where he was employed. If you're on someone's payroll and working in their building, I think it's sort of reasonable for them to expect that you're working to advance their interests rather than your own.
Your new top talent goes on to create many millions of dollars of value for your company.
Or so you think, until you wake up one morning and discover that he's left for Facebook along with the high-profile new technology you thought you was going to bring you many millions of dollars in game revenue.
Sorry, but it sounds like since you hero-worship John Carmack he shouldn't be required to abide by any sort of contractual agreements he signs up to, which strikes me as a bit immature.
If Carmack felt like developing VR outside of Zenimax offices, he obviously could have. So it must be true that Zenimax didn't actually help VR in any substantial way. Carmack's VR development just happened to take place within a Zenimax building.
He had a contractual exemption for Armadillo. His development 'just happened' to take place inside a Zenimax building, ie the workplace where he was employed. If you're on someone's payroll and working in their building, I think it's sort of reasonable for them to expect that you're working to advance their interests rather than your own.
Your new top talent goes on to create many millions of dollars of value for your company.
Or so you think, until you wake up one morning and discover that he's left for Facebook along with the high-profile new technology you thought you was going to bring you many millions of dollars in game revenue.
Sorry, but it sounds like since you hero-worship John Carmack he shouldn't be required to abide by any sort of contractual agreements he signs up to, which strikes me as a bit immature.
While I haven't read the complaint and am not informed on the specifics of this case, I agree that under the parent commenter's logic, there'd be no commercial benefit to paying for R&D. If you're going to pump the cash into R&D, you have to be able to net something from it. R&D-type guys are going to have many varied interests, and it's certainly advisable that they create a hard, impermeable separation between things that they want their employer to be able to claim, and things they don't (i.e., don't even think about projects that you don't want your employer to claim while you're on their clock, in their building, or using their mail servers).
It may be that Carmack was used to there not really being a major distinction between what he owned and what id owned, and got caught off-guard by ZeniMax's insistence that this was a ZeniMax-only kind of thing now.
It may be that Carmack was used to there not really being a major distinction between what he owned and what id owned, and got caught off-guard by ZeniMax's insistence that this was a ZeniMax-only kind of thing now.
Why assume when you can read plaintiff's description of events in the suit[0], which directly challenges your assumptions and contains some extremely damning evidence?
[0]: http://www.scribd.com/doc/225491347/ZeniMax-v-Oculus-Complai...
[0]: http://www.scribd.com/doc/225491347/ZeniMax-v-Oculus-Complai...
> If Carmack felt like developing VR outside of Zenimax offices, he obviously could have. So it must be true that Zenimax didn't actually help VR in any substantial way.
How does that follow?
(Standard disclaimer: I know nothing of the merits of the case, the background, &c., ad naus., and thus speak not thereto. I'm just curious how parent sees the logic working here.)
How does that follow?
(Standard disclaimer: I know nothing of the merits of the case, the background, &c., ad naus., and thus speak not thereto. I'm just curious how parent sees the logic working here.)
What about Apple? Are they hurting? Why should it be different for a company like Zenimax than it is for Apple?
Who would want to work for Zenimax after this?
ZeniMax has the rights to an awfully big stable of awfully important gaming properties. I think a lot of people - even people who don't like anything about this nasty little scrap - will be willing to hold their noses.
ZeniMax has the rights to an awfully big stable of awfully important gaming properties. I think a lot of people - even people who don't like anything about this nasty little scrap - will be willing to hold their noses.
I'm sure they'll be able to comfort themselves with the million of dollars they're going to get.
Starting on page 20:
Could be ugly.
57. On July 26, 2012, Luckey again asked for
ZeniMax’s help with the Kickstarter video,
specifically asking Carmack to provide a clip
“talking about the Rift/VR in general/whatever
else you think would be a great thing to have.”
Luckey further acknowledged: “Your reputation has
really helped the credibility of this project, and
having that credibility in the video would make a
big difference for alot [sic] of people.” Carmack
declined Luckey’s request to appear in the
Kickstarter video.
58. At about that same time, Carmack advised
Luckey: “It is very important that you NOT use
anything that could be construed as Zenimax
property in the promotion of your product. Showing
my R&D testbed with the Rage media would be bad,
for instance.”
59. Luckey replied, “I will make
sure we do not show the Rage demo in the
Kickstarter, but is there any chance we can
mention support/show a quick clip from Doom 3/BFG
Edition?” ZeniMax turned down Luckey’s request,
instructing that Luckey rely on publicly-available
information for Kickstarter promotional material.
60. On August 1, 2012, Luckey launched the Oculus
Kickstarter campaign. The funding target was set
at $250,000. The Kickstarter page featured a
five-minute video describing the modified Rift
headset.
61. In blatant disregard of ZeniMax’s rights,
Defendants used ZeniMax’s intellectual property in
the Kickstarter video. The video features multiple
clips showing “DOOM 3: BFG Edition,” displayed on
the modified Rift headset. The video also used
“DOOM 3: BFG Edition” to promote the modified Rift
by displaying, without authorization, ZeniMax’s
logo for “DOOM 3: BFG Edition” as the first
Oculus-Rift ready game. Further, despite the lack
of any commercial agreement with ZeniMax,
Defendants promised that certain backers of the
Kickstarter campaign would receive copies of
ZeniMax’s game “DOOM 3: BFG Edition” with support
for the modified Rift.
Could be ugly.
I hope everybody who comments on this story reads the complaint. There's some really damning stuff in there and some of the more damning claims come with evidence, including Oculus demanding exclusive licensing of IP "shared by Carmack" during negotiations (paragraph 77). That stands in contrast to public statements from Oculus that ZeniMax contributed nothing.
ZeniMax knows that Oculus holds the stronger public opinion, for two reasons: (1) people love Oculus, and (2) Minecraft fans are still stinging from ZeniMax's trademark claims against Mojang re: Scrolls. Very good play on ZeniMax's part, dropping a release and an extremely well-written complaint at once. They want to control the narrative.
ZeniMax knows that Oculus holds the stronger public opinion, for two reasons: (1) people love Oculus, and (2) Minecraft fans are still stinging from ZeniMax's trademark claims against Mojang re: Scrolls. Very good play on ZeniMax's part, dropping a release and an extremely well-written complaint at once. They want to control the narrative.
The whole complaint is interesting. The tricky thing about citing claims about ZeniMax's IP is that those claims hinge on the IP actually belonging to ZeniMax. Oculus and Carmack may be able to make a case that the VR work Carmack did isn't bound up in Carmack's work-for-hire agreement with ZeniMax.
But directly using ZeniMax properties to promote the thing while working under a cloud of IP ownership uncertainty was probably not a great move.
But directly using ZeniMax properties to promote the thing while working under a cloud of IP ownership uncertainty was probably not a great move.
While Oculus surely shouldn't have used ZeniMax's stuff in their demo, and should definitely pay some kind of damages for it, it seems like a small part of what's at play.
Or is it supposed to show how fast-and-loose Oculus was with other people's stuff?
Edit At least reading through the rest, and taking ZeniMax at their word, it looks like ZeniMax has a credible claim that it's their software that got the Rift working. But if true, it feels like there should be some discrete evidence of that by looking at what's running on the Rift.
Or is it supposed to show how fast-and-loose Oculus was with other people's stuff?
Edit At least reading through the rest, and taking ZeniMax at their word, it looks like ZeniMax has a credible claim that it's their software that got the Rift working. But if true, it feels like there should be some discrete evidence of that by looking at what's running on the Rift.
[deleted]
After reading, I was reminded of ConnectU LLC v. Mark Zuckerberg and The Facebook, Inc. Which, given recent events around the ownership of Oculus, is hilarious.
[deleted]
I hope everybody who comments on this story reads the complaint. There's some really damning stuff in there...
Naturally a complaint will be written to portray the defendant in as unfavorable a light as possible. As with federal indictments, I wouldn't want to see people form their opinions of a company based on the content of a one-sided complaint against them (not a lawyer, not legal advice).
I was fairly vocally opposed to the Facebook acquisition of Oculus, but still, let's wait for the Oculus response and subsequent settlement or trial.
Naturally a complaint will be written to portray the defendant in as unfavorable a light as possible. As with federal indictments, I wouldn't want to see people form their opinions of a company based on the content of a one-sided complaint against them (not a lawyer, not legal advice).
I was fairly vocally opposed to the Facebook acquisition of Oculus, but still, let's wait for the Oculus response and subsequent settlement or trial.
You conveniently snipped the part of that observation that included evidence.
Evidence selectively included in a complaint or indictment is still biased. One can present a carefully chosen subset of all knowable facts in support of nearly any position.
However, it was not my intention to misconstrue your comment, and if you feel that I have done so, I apologize.
However, it was not my intention to misconstrue your comment, and if you feel that I have done so, I apologize.
prediction: facebook settles with zenimax for an undisclosed amount of money/stock/ip licensing with no admittance of wrong doing.
The use of Doom3 in the Kickstarter (I remember feeling like Carmack had given his seal of approval), definitely provides Zenimax with ammo, and I agree, it could be ugly.
Like so many other (game) programmers, Carmack is a hero of mine, and the bias runs deep. In reading the complaint, though, I was starting to feel for Zenimax, but when the "$500 worth of optics" phrase started appearing, they lost me. The kit, as described in the thread where Carmack and Palmer first interacted in public, was to be a display, display-controller, and some sort of ski-goggle based contraption you could put together. And, iirc, $300 was the price discussed.
But I think the really key point, missing from this complaint, is that, before Carmack (and Abrash at Valve) improved on the Rift, it had stirred up interest because of the concept of using simple, _cheap_, optics, that would allow the display to be closer to the eyes (wide FOV), and pre-correcting for the resulting distortion in software.
Carmack and Abrash provided some secret sauce that I'm sure will be vital to the sense of presence that will drive broad appeal, but the breakthrough was saying "so what if the optics massively distort the image; we'll fix it in software". From what I've read, I'm pretty sure that wasn't Palmer's idea to begin with either, but he was the first one to run with it.
Like so many other (game) programmers, Carmack is a hero of mine, and the bias runs deep. In reading the complaint, though, I was starting to feel for Zenimax, but when the "$500 worth of optics" phrase started appearing, they lost me. The kit, as described in the thread where Carmack and Palmer first interacted in public, was to be a display, display-controller, and some sort of ski-goggle based contraption you could put together. And, iirc, $300 was the price discussed.
But I think the really key point, missing from this complaint, is that, before Carmack (and Abrash at Valve) improved on the Rift, it had stirred up interest because of the concept of using simple, _cheap_, optics, that would allow the display to be closer to the eyes (wide FOV), and pre-correcting for the resulting distortion in software.
Carmack and Abrash provided some secret sauce that I'm sure will be vital to the sense of presence that will drive broad appeal, but the breakthrough was saying "so what if the optics massively distort the image; we'll fix it in software". From what I've read, I'm pretty sure that wasn't Palmer's idea to begin with either, but he was the first one to run with it.
What I found the most interesting in the complaint is the fact that Zenimax consistently provided Oculus with IP under their supposed NDA, while suggesting some form a compensation to Zenimax.
Even though Oculus was not responding (initially) to those requests, Zenimax STILL continued providing code to run on the Rift. It almost looks like Zenimax was trying to get to a point where they could sue Oculus.
The complaint then clearly describes Oculus's proposal (2% equity, subject to dilution, etc) and conveniently glosses over Zenimax's "larger share of equity" counter offer (which Oculus seemingly found far fetched).
And then the turning point; when Zenimax instructed Carmack to stop providing code for the Rift to Oculus, Carmack resigns and joins Oculus (eventually with 5 other "key" VR employees of Zenimax).
I can definitely see how this looks bad for Oculus. They will probably get slapped for the unauthorized IP usage for the DOOM videos, logos per their NDA. But for actual code? Who knows..
The Rift most likely does not run any of Zenimax's code at this point since Carmack must have rewritten it from scratch. But Carmack would obviously remember what and how he wrote the Rift's software; would that count as still infringing upon Zenimax's IP?
Even though Oculus was not responding (initially) to those requests, Zenimax STILL continued providing code to run on the Rift. It almost looks like Zenimax was trying to get to a point where they could sue Oculus.
The complaint then clearly describes Oculus's proposal (2% equity, subject to dilution, etc) and conveniently glosses over Zenimax's "larger share of equity" counter offer (which Oculus seemingly found far fetched).
And then the turning point; when Zenimax instructed Carmack to stop providing code for the Rift to Oculus, Carmack resigns and joins Oculus (eventually with 5 other "key" VR employees of Zenimax).
I can definitely see how this looks bad for Oculus. They will probably get slapped for the unauthorized IP usage for the DOOM videos, logos per their NDA. But for actual code? Who knows..
The Rift most likely does not run any of Zenimax's code at this point since Carmack must have rewritten it from scratch. But Carmack would obviously remember what and how he wrote the Rift's software; would that count as still infringing upon Zenimax's IP?
I think the complaint purposefully blurs the distinction between "Carmack" and "Zenimax" during Carmack's period of employment.
So it makes their behaviour look a bit contradictory: one part of Zenimax is asking for (or hinting at) compensation, and another part is setting up FTP sites to transfer code, supplying technical advice and more. And this is happening simultaneously.
But really, that second part is just Carmack being friendly with Luckey, who is at this point some kid in his garage with cool VR tech.
Carmack didn't really resign — his employment contract was up in June 2013. I'm guessing he had a lot of free reign at Zenimax and was likely bored. VR gave him something to be passionate about again, and he just had to wait out his contract before he could go all-in.
So it makes their behaviour look a bit contradictory: one part of Zenimax is asking for (or hinting at) compensation, and another part is setting up FTP sites to transfer code, supplying technical advice and more. And this is happening simultaneously.
But really, that second part is just Carmack being friendly with Luckey, who is at this point some kid in his garage with cool VR tech.
Carmack didn't really resign — his employment contract was up in June 2013. I'm guessing he had a lot of free reign at Zenimax and was likely bored. VR gave him something to be passionate about again, and he just had to wait out his contract before he could go all-in.
>hen, after being warned by Carmack not to do it, Luckey creates a Kickstarter that prominently features id games.
Just idly wondering...
If I created a fancy gaming mouse and wrote some software integration with a popular gaming series at the time, could I not offer that as a reward tier for a Kickstarter? I would think as long as I can get resellable boxed copies I could throw it in?
Just idly wondering...
If I created a fancy gaming mouse and wrote some software integration with a popular gaming series at the time, could I not offer that as a reward tier for a Kickstarter? I would think as long as I can get resellable boxed copies I could throw it in?
Companies can usually - one way or another - legally control whether their products are used in a promotional manner.
For example, if you create a gaming mouse, buy ten retail copies of the new Doom 7 right off the retail shelves and offer them for promotional purposes at no cost along with your mouse, the publisher (or sometimes game creator) can ask you to cease and desist. The lawsuit, were one to occur, might argue that you're causing misrepresentation (have to be careful not to make it look like your gaming mouse is being endorsed by the game creator or publisher etc), or claim that you're damaging their game's brand through commercial association they didn't approve of, and they could also go the route of claiming you're commercially benefiting from association with their game / brand and seek monetary compensation.
Way back when, circa mid to late 1990's I ran into these types of problems in the gaming industry with a company I operated. The gaming world was a lot more legally benign back then and it was still a serious problem. Back then you could often easily get permission from the company to do a promotion, but you properly would check in with their PR / marketing group and get formal approval. id Software was often decent about these types of things. They did a zillion community promotions of all sorts.
For example, if you create a gaming mouse, buy ten retail copies of the new Doom 7 right off the retail shelves and offer them for promotional purposes at no cost along with your mouse, the publisher (or sometimes game creator) can ask you to cease and desist. The lawsuit, were one to occur, might argue that you're causing misrepresentation (have to be careful not to make it look like your gaming mouse is being endorsed by the game creator or publisher etc), or claim that you're damaging their game's brand through commercial association they didn't approve of, and they could also go the route of claiming you're commercially benefiting from association with their game / brand and seek monetary compensation.
Way back when, circa mid to late 1990's I ran into these types of problems in the gaming industry with a company I operated. The gaming world was a lot more legally benign back then and it was still a serious problem. Back then you could often easily get permission from the company to do a promotion, but you properly would check in with their PR / marketing group and get formal approval. id Software was often decent about these types of things. They did a zillion community promotions of all sorts.
I'm not a lawyer but I don't know how they could legitimately win a suit for something so innocuous. This sounds like one of those things that people tell you to try to scare you out of doing something that the PR department doesn't like but really has no authority to control.
There's nothing illegal about giving out free copies of something that you bought off the shelf, whether or not you have the vendor's authorization to do that. They could claim some type of fraudulent misrepresentation, but I'd think the violations would have to be flagrant and egregious for something like that to fly.
There's nothing illegal about giving out free copies of something that you bought off the shelf, whether or not you have the vendor's authorization to do that. They could claim some type of fraudulent misrepresentation, but I'd think the violations would have to be flagrant and egregious for something like that to fly.
[deleted]
from the article:
Looks like a negotiating strategy by Zenimax... and since Oculus lacks deep pockets, which pressure could be effective. That is, absent the counter-pressure of public opinion...
the key technology Luckey used to establish Oculus was developed by Zenimax
Looks like a negotiating strategy by Zenimax... and since Oculus lacks deep pockets, which pressure could be effective. That is, absent the counter-pressure of public opinion...
They're talking about the SDK and most of the headset technology as well as the firmware. Luckey's key contribution was the wide-angle optics.
Actually, the wide-angle optics came from Luckey's professor, Mark Bolas [1,2]. Luckey combined it with the head angle tracking and a vastly polished design for the unit, though.
[1] http://projects.ict.usc.edu/mxr/diy/fov2go-viewer/ [2] http://blog.kenperlin.com/?p=14708
[1] http://projects.ict.usc.edu/mxr/diy/fov2go-viewer/ [2] http://blog.kenperlin.com/?p=14708
Here is a copy of the complaint [1]. Originally posted here [2]. Interesting reading...
[1] http://cdn0.vox-cdn.com/assets/4490157/1-main.pdf
[2] http://www.theverge.com/2014/5/21/5739086/oculus-vr-and-its-...
[1] http://cdn0.vox-cdn.com/assets/4490157/1-main.pdf
[2] http://www.theverge.com/2014/5/21/5739086/oculus-vr-and-its-...
It is a shame that such a delightful piece of technology is getting mired in human politics. The complaint, being from one viewpoint, definitely portrays a grey area during those two years of ZeniMax "nicely asking". I guess I am just a little upset at the prospect that this could delay or effect the quality of Oculus. I do not know the VR industry enough to know if this lawsuit would cause side effects in any competitors.
Edit: Clarified "this lawsuit" and "side effects in any competitors".
Edit: Clarified "this lawsuit" and "side effects in any competitors".
It's not about politics, it's about grabbing some money from Oculus now that Facebook backed them up. Where there is a lot of cash, there's usually a lawsuit not far away. And most of the time this is settled out of court for undisclosed amounts.
Did you read the complaint, or at least the first few pages of it? I'm as big a fan of the Rift as anyone, but as another commenter said, it is "pretty damning" if you look at it objectively.
Eh, not really, because it's the plaintiff's complaint. It's supposed to seem damning or the lawyer isn't doing their job. That's like reading an indictment and expecting it to be anywhere close to reality. You can't really start to judge until after the facts are out and everyone has had a chance to address allegations.
I was expecting Carmack's name to appear in the press release. I cannot say I'm disappointed after reading the complaint.
The whole piece reads as if ZeniMax felt that it has somehow acquired possession of Carmack's knowledge (or any other of its employees), which at least for me seems to be totally absurd.
The whole piece reads as if ZeniMax felt that it has somehow acquired possession of Carmack's knowledge (or any other of its employees), which at least for me seems to be totally absurd.
It's not that absurd. A lot of the VR demos used Zenimax games, and many of the videos and interviews were filmed right inside Zenimax offices. Code was written on Zenimax time and file transfers, emails for advice, and more were made over Zenimax email addresses.
Carmack obviously re-wrote all code once leaving Zenimax, but there's a case to be made that Zenimax giving Carmack free reign to work on Oculus while at Zenimax significantly benefited Oculus.
Oculus agreed at some point — offering Zenimax a 2% stake. Zenimax asked for more (amount not specified in the complaint). Oculus response was that the "figure was so far out of the ballpark, we believe there is little hope" — negotiations broke down there.
Carmack obviously re-wrote all code once leaving Zenimax, but there's a case to be made that Zenimax giving Carmack free reign to work on Oculus while at Zenimax significantly benefited Oculus.
Oculus agreed at some point — offering Zenimax a 2% stake. Zenimax asked for more (amount not specified in the complaint). Oculus response was that the "figure was so far out of the ballpark, we believe there is little hope" — negotiations broke down there.
[deleted]
[deleted]
Weird, but that PDF URL blows up Chrome for me when I click if from there, but not when I click it from the Verge article. It's the same URL.
Zenimax is based in Maryland, and Oculus in California. How strange that they filed the case in a north Texas court!
I've noticed this trend also, I asked google and got this response from wikipedia:
> An individual case often begins with a perfunctory infringement complaint,[31] or even a mere threat of suit, which is often enough to encourage settlement for the nuisance or "threat value" of the suit by purchasing a license to the patent. In the United States, suits are often brought in United States District Court for the Eastern District of Texas, known for favoring plaintiffs and for expertise in patent suits.[53]
Source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Patent_troll
> An individual case often begins with a perfunctory infringement complaint,[31] or even a mere threat of suit, which is often enough to encourage settlement for the nuisance or "threat value" of the suit by purchasing a license to the patent. In the United States, suits are often brought in United States District Court for the Eastern District of Texas, known for favoring plaintiffs and for expertise in patent suits.[53]
Source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Patent_troll
That doesn't really check out. Surely, if they were forum-shopping, they would have brought it in the Eastern District, which has a 57.5% success rate, instead of the Northern District, which has a 40.6% success rate. (The national average is 32.4%.)
Yeah, but this suit is in the North district of Texas, not the East district.
id Software, the subsidiary in question, is based in Texas. Oculus also has an office there (although not their main one). Obviously ZeniMax are going to pick the venue that they think they have the best chance of winning at, but in this case there are actually some pretty strong connections.
id was originally based in Mesquite, Tx. That's why there's a lot of dev houses (well, were, at any rate) in the Dallas area for game development.
Oculus opened a branch office there (surprise!), probably for Carmack.
Oculus opened a branch office there (surprise!), probably for Carmack.
Ah, that makes a little more sense then. I was thinking they were just going for the "better" legal system.
[deleted]
I originally thought (based on the text of the agreement between Zenimax & Luckey, but absent the other details in the complaint) that Zenimax had a poor case and would see the agreement voided on technicalities. But these new details seem to show Luckey acted in rather bad faith from early on, which makes for a very different case. Now I'm wondering if Facebook bought a pig in a poke.
I did not realize that Zenimax was in such dire straits. Although after losing its star coder I expect that made things harder for them.
For what its worth, these sorts of lawsuits come out of the woodwork when ever a 'liquidity event' happens. From folks suing companies about to go public, to targets of large acquisitions. Always interesting to read what they have to say when they try the 'appeal to the public' angle.
For what its worth, these sorts of lawsuits come out of the woodwork when ever a 'liquidity event' happens. From folks suing companies about to go public, to targets of large acquisitions. Always interesting to read what they have to say when they try the 'appeal to the public' angle.
Zenimax spent about $200MM on The Elder Scrolls Online, and they're expecting to take a serious hit financially.
Of course they launched another AAA game this week and I can't say with this news i'm particularly interested in supporting Zenimax financially in their lawsuit.
Of course they launched another AAA game this week and I can't say with this news i'm particularly interested in supporting Zenimax financially in their lawsuit.
Who puts out a press release announcing a lawsuit?
Lots of companies - you've filed the lawsuit, so the press is going to pick it up anyway. You might as well issue a statement at the same time.
A company that wants to control the narrative.
Filed in the northern district of texas, of course, where every other IP troll goes to file suits. Really all you need to know about the merits.
This lawsuit reminds me of John Fogerty getting sued for plagiarizing himself.
I'm really interested to see how this plays out. Zenimax definitely has a case when you read the filing. So who knows, they may have some grounds.
Interesting: the URL no longer takes us to the announcement, and the link on their press page supposedly to their press release is now broken.
[deleted]
Lawyers lol
The moderators of /r/Games verified that the above comment is from a current Id employee. The reason I'm crossposting it here is because it's an interesting datapoint about the mindset of the people at Zenimax.