PDA

View Full Version : Black Ops 2 LEGAL TROUBLE: May Not See Store Shelves?


xOverLorDx
05-08-2012, 06:52 PM
http://www.gameinformer.com/b/news/archive/2012/05/07/infinity-ward-activision-black-ops-ii.aspx


Activision and Treyarch may have landed themselves in some legal hot water because of the futuristic setting of Black Ops 2 due to a prior legal agreement between Infinity Ward and Activision

i NatrlKilla i
05-08-2012, 07:37 PM
One likely scenario is that Activision believes the agreement was voided when West and Zampella were fired, allowing Treyarch to legally break the Vietnam barrier. Despite this, we may not know for sure until more details of the ongoing trial are made public.
They could get away with it, as it does state in the MOU that if both members of IW Management were no longer employed, that the restrictions would be rescinded.
However, a reply to someones comment goes:
But Activision fired them, without any proof which I would of thought would give them grounds for a legal battle considering there are employment laws? Until Activision prove the founders of IW where plotting/talking with EA and inbreach of the original contract that led to them being removed, they still have grounds for legal action.

This on the other hand does look like Activision didnt just fire them for supposed talks with EA but maybe to cover up the breach of the MOU that was set up between the companies.
so if Activision cant prove it, they may have to pay royalties to IW and/or West and Zampella.

DEG23
05-08-2012, 08:07 PM
Wow, i had no idea these sort of laws existed in the industry. It seems like a stupid contract, people don't buy these games for the 'Modern Warfare' brand they buy it for the 'Call of Duty' brand.

Nevander
05-08-2012, 08:59 PM
This is completely off topic but DEG23 your signature is epic. 'Nuff said.

On topic, I think it will still see store shelves. It's a CoD title, which means Activision will want it out to make all their hard earned, err milked money.

killeralltime
05-08-2012, 09:50 PM
IW would be stupid if they go on with the law suit, because Activision will just fire them then the whole studio would be screwed. i think IW will be smart not to do anything

i NatrlKilla i
05-08-2012, 10:30 PM
IW would be stupid if they go on with the law suit, because Activision will just fire them then the whole studio would be screwed. i think IW will be smart not to do anything

On what grounds would Activision fire them? They already have one lawsuit over unpaid earnings (and I think the firing aswell) of West/Zampella and the IW employees that left. They don't need another one.
If West and Zampella win the law suit it's because they were fired without proof, and right now, that's the only way I see there of even being a possibility of the game not being released. And if they win, IW will probably be getting a payout anyway.
The MOU states that only IW are allowed to make a Call of Duty in 'the modern (post Vietnam), near future or distant future.settings.' (As long as W/Z were with the company. If W/Z were wrongly fired, the judge in charge could rule in favor of IW)

So there's a few options available.
1. The pair were wrongly fired, they have an injunction put on Black Ops II, and win the law suit, getting a very nice payout.
2. Activision settle with West/Zampella. Pay them off, and give royalties. IW also possibly get royalties for Black Ops II.
3. They were in discussions with EA which means Activision were allowed to fire them, meaning that as per the MOU, IW are no longer the only ones allowed/have control of, Call of Duty games that are set after Vietnam. Black Ops II releases as planned.

Activision doesn't want option 1. Even if the injunction is only until after the lawsuit, that could still be months, or even years. And if they lose, Black Ops II is likely never released. To prevent that, they go with option 2, or if they can prove they were justified in firing W/Z, they go with option 3.

I'm tired, so I've probably missed a few things or made a few mistakes, but the general stuff is there.

killeralltime
05-08-2012, 10:54 PM
On what grounds would Activision fire them? They already have one lawsuit over unpaid earnings (and I think the firing aswell) of West/Zampella and the IW employees that left. They don't need another one.
If West and Zampella win the law suit it's because they were fired without proof, and right now, that's the only way I see there of even being a possibility of the game not being released. And if they win, IW will probably be getting a payout anyway.
The MOU states that only IW are allowed to make a Call of Duty in 'the modern (post Vietnam), near future or distant future.settings.' (As long as W/Z were with the company. If W/Z were wrongly fired, the judge in charge could rule in favor of IW)

So there's a few options available.
1. The pair were wrongly fired, they have an injunction put on Black Ops II, and win the law suit, getting a very nice payout.
2. Activision settle with West/Zampella. Pay them off, and give royalties. IW also possibly get royalties for Black Ops II.
3. They were in discussions with EA which means Activision were allowed to fire them, meaning that as per the MOU, IW are no longer the only ones allowed/have control of, Call of Duty games that are set after Vietnam. Black Ops II releases as planned.

Activision doesn't want option 1. Even if the injunction is only until after the lawsuit, that could still be months, or even years. And if they lose, Black Ops II is likely never released. To prevent that, they go with option 2, or if they can prove they were justified in firing W/Z, they go with option 3.

I'm tired, so I've probably missed a few things or made a few mistakes, but the general stuff is there.

If IW wanted to do something about Black ops2 they would of halted the game while they were producing it, but now its too late the court will never grant the halt of Black ops2. And if they do IW will just do it to get a piece of Treyarch money. Because IW is just jealous of treyarch fame with black ops1 MW3 was a horrible "success". and i think it really hurt the franchise. if they do proceed it will just be a low blow and IW will really be hated. And you know what else is sad, is the fact that Treyarch work alone on their games and IW needs help with Sledgehammer,and treyarch always make the better game, and the only decent thing in MW3 was the SP(that IW barley helped with it was all SH) so all with this said no matter what happens IW-will always be hated and IW=FAIL

i NatrlKilla i
05-08-2012, 11:16 PM
If IW wanted to do something about Black ops2 they would of halted the game while they were producing it, but now its too late the court will never grant the halt of Black ops2. And if they do IW will just do it to get a piece of Treyarch money. Because IW is just jealous of treyarch fame with black ops1 MW3 was a horrible "success". and i think it really hurt the franchise. if they do proceed it will just be a low blow and IW will really be hated. And you know what else is sad, is the fact that Treyarch work alone on their games and IW needs help with Sledgehammer,and treyarch always make the better game, and the only decent thing in MW3 was the SP(that IW barley helped with it was all SH) so all with this said no matter what happens IW-will always be hated and IW=FAIL

How would they know what's being worked on? Activision/Treyarch could easily keep it away from them. Not saying they did, but it's possible.

Also, if Activision don't settle, or prove they were justified in firing West and Zampella, the court would very likely enforce an injunction.

It's not 'Treyarch money' if the court agrees with IW or West & Zampella though.

Low blow? Again, if the court agrees, they're entitled to do it.

Finally, (in my opinion) Treyarch don't always make the best games. MW2 is my favorite Call of Duty, then Black Ops. However, I will say that Black Ops is 10 x better than MW3.

Just for the record, I like Treyarch more than IW, it's just if Activision do have to pay out to IW, then they obviously deserved it.

xOverLorDx
05-10-2012, 07:26 PM
UPDATE (5/9/2012): Activision responded to this story with the following: “There is no basis for the plaintiffs in the Infinity Ward suit to block the release of Call of Duty: Black Ops II.”

If GTA V may Release This October i'm gonna buy gta v over this shitty cod so badly anyways.
so long

CMCX360
05-11-2012, 12:59 AM
I really think Infinity Ward will no longer be making CODs. MW3 is their last. Write it down.

i NatrlKilla i
05-17-2012, 01:55 PM
http://www.joystiq.com/2012/05/16/ea-and-activision-settle-in-call-of-duty-lawsuit/

Kunduz
05-17-2012, 02:36 PM
ha, I didn't know that these types of laws even existed :P

kyboy
05-18-2012, 02:10 AM
I really think Infinity Ward will no longer be making CODs. MW3 is their last. Write it down.

Wouldn't bother me any lol. I like treyarchs cod games better. I bought MW3 used and sold it a month later. But any way, I hope they bring back the dive! I loved diving out of the way of RPGs lol

ZingZitang
05-31-2012, 05:11 PM
Wow, i had no idea these sort of laws existed in the industry. Game Development isn't any different than any other business. Contract Breach/Contention happens. <---Edit - this sounds condescending, it is not intended.

It seems like a stupid contract, people don't buy these games for the 'Modern Warfare' brand they buy it for the 'Call of Duty' brand.I agree, but I also Disagree to some extent. If people didn't buy the 'Modern Warfare' Brand, then why is there so much Fanboy hate for the Games outside of the Modern Warfare brand?(World at War/Black OPs. Both of which are better then any Modern Warfare game in my opinion)

i NatrlKilla i
06-02-2012, 06:04 PM
Activision settled with West and Zampella.

http://www.joystiq.com/2012/05/31/west-zampella-settle-with-activision-in-infinity-ward-lawsuit/