West/Zampella Lawyer Dismisses New Email Evidence

Logan Westbrook

Transform, Roll Out, Etc
Feb 21, 2008
17,672
0
0
West/Zampella Lawyer Dismisses New Email Evidence

Activision is trying to destroy the former Infinity Ward heads' reputation, says the pair's attorney.

A representative for Vince Zampella and Jason West has dismissed the emails presented by Activision as proof of the men's insubordination as a desperate attempt to avoid paying them the millions of dollars of bonuses they supposedly owe them.

It emerged yesterday [http://www.escapistmagazine.com/news/view/107137-EA-Added-As-Defendant-To-Activisions-Infinity-Ward-Countersuit], that Activision had been successful in efforts to add EA to its complaint against the West and Zampella. This was due, at least in part, to email evidence that suggested that - as Activision had previously claimed - there had been an effort on the part of the two men to delay the release of a Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 2 map pack in EA's favor. EA representative, Jeff Brown, said that the email - which came from EA DICE's Lincoln Hershberger, and was sent to a number of EA executives, like DICE boss Patrick Söderlund, and EA Games president Frank Gibeau - was a joke and shouldn't be taken seriously.

In a statement, West and Zampella's lawyer, Bobby Schwartz went a little further, and said Activision's claims that the email proved some kind of collusion between EA and his clients was "a desperate attempt ... to find some basis to justify its misconduct and refusal to pay what it owes." He added that all the email actually proved was the incredible ill will that Activision bore the two men. He said that not only was the publisher refusing to honor the contract it had with the former Infinity Ward heads, but it was trying to destroy their ability to find work anywhere else in the industry, a point that he said he would make very clear to the jury.

It's very easy to fall into the trap of siding with the little guy, especially when the big guy is Activision, but it sounds like this already complicated case could have a lot more going on than anyone first thought. This email could be nothing more than an ill-timed joke, or it could be a vital piece of evidence, and it's impossible to know for sure at this stage.

Source: Kotaku [http://kotaku.com/5738885/did-the-creators-of-call-of-duty-delay-a-map-pack-to-help-out-the-competition]





Permalink
 

Delusibeta

Reachin' out...
Mar 7, 2010
2,594
0
0
Of course, considering THQ turned the pair away before they sealed the EA deal...

I am of the opinion that Activision is talking out of their arse in this case.
 

zombie711

New member
Aug 17, 2009
1,505
0
0
God damn it. this case has me more confused then When I saw an episode of Lost, and come back later to find out that everything inthat season is a lie, except some things which dont count. What I'm attempting to say is I have know idea who's winning and who is complaining about what. Its all so hectic. Also Logan, 1 more post and you will have 6600 posts.
 

JourneyThroughHell

New member
Sep 21, 2009
5,010
0
0
So is it a joke or is it a fake?

Doesn't matter, really. I don't expect West/Zampella to win the case anyway. I want them to, though.

Not because they're the little guys, but because they're the guys who didn't get their due for making what I consider fantastic games.

But, really, having Emails as evidence makes no sense - say what you want about West and Zampella, but they are not that stupid.
 

Unrulyhandbag

New member
Oct 21, 2009
462
0
0
It doesn't matter if Activision is right on this matter.

You can sack people but you can't refuse to pay them money they are ALREADY owed. No matter the legal loopholes it's just amoral and, if handled in public, makes the company look very bad.
 

squid5580

Elite Member
Feb 20, 2008
5,106
0
41
Kheapathic said:
I'm surprised Activision is accusing them of holding back release dates to coincide with better timing for EA. Companies do stuff like that all the time, gauging release dates is just another part of business. Granted it could hurt Activision but with Kotick flapping his fat mouth about how most XBLIVE accounts are there to play Call of Duty I doubt the timing of the release would hurt anyone. Now about them looking elsewhere, granted I don't know the time frame of when everything started going down. But if my boss was to tell me I don't get my bonus for making the company a lot of money; I'd first look for employment elsewhere and then when it's assured I'd file a lawsuit for unpaid earnings. Which is what I hope this is. Damage to the company is apparent with all the reports of Bobby opening his mouth... if people want to jump ship and take their crew with them they can. Game developers can go on strike but when you're not getting what you're owed your hands are tied. I'm sure there's a lot of unknowns about this case, but I hope Activision gets taken to the cleaners.
Oh sure companies do that all the time. But this is not that scenario. What the email is claiming is the dynamic duo there sabatogued the release to give EA the edge.

It will be interesting to see how this ends
 

sunburst

Media Snob
Mar 19, 2010
666
0
0
I'd be more inclined to believe Activision's claims that they have a real case if they weren't constantly screwing over their partners with lawsuits. Unfortunately, their reputation precedes them and I'm pretty much obligated to believe they're full of shit. Because they always are.
 

Jonci

New member
Sep 15, 2009
539
0
0
Personally I think they'll need more than an internal email from EA to prove communication with Zampella and West. Where are the emails that EA would have send to them or Zampella or West agreeing to anything?
Not to moment that both Zampella and West had a vested interest in the success of MW2 and its DLC, as they would receive bonuses from the profit. There's no reason for them to purposely sabotage the game. I want to know how Activision will spin that piece.
 

RUINER ACTUAL

New member
Oct 29, 2009
1,835
0
0
Right, Activision. Destroy the reputations of the guys who created Medal of Honor and Call of Duty. Good luck. I can't wait for Respawn's game to come out. Maybe an announcement at E3? Those two, plus all the animation leads, writers, and design leads, plus the IW head MP map desiger left IW. Who is left? Regardless if they were talking to EA, I'm not backing Activision up on this one, or any one, ever.
 

Aiddon_v1legacy

New member
Nov 19, 2009
3,672
0
0
This is becoming nothing less than a war between Activision and EA. I almost wonder if Acti is just doing this because they know if they win they damage one of their biggest competitors
 
Feb 13, 2008
19,430
0
0
Activision ruined their reputation by almost every lawsuit they have ever pulled. Even if they are 100% in the right, their conduct now is nothing short of financial bullying.

That alone should crush the case.
 
Apr 28, 2008
14,634
0
0
HankMan said:
Oh no Oh no Oh no
You didn't pay me what owe!
I thought more of this:

Just replace "Santa" with Activision, "Security/Mall" with emain, and "santa stalker" with West/Zampella.

*ahem*

Anyway, glad to see the email was a joke. Or if we're still not clear on it, I really hope it was a joke...
 

Tom Phoenix

New member
Mar 28, 2009
1,161
0
0
Delusibeta said:
Of course, considering THQ turned the pair away before they sealed the EA deal...

I am of the opinion that Activision is talking out of their arse in this case.
The thing is, who is to say the two didn't fake interest in THQ's offer, just so they could have "proof" that they weren't in secret talks with EA, and actually intended to go to EA all along? West and Zampella probably aren't dumb. If they were indeed in talks with EA while they were still heads of Infinity Ward, chances are that they would try to cover their tracks.

No matter how you slice it, the fact that West and Zampella signed a deal with EA to form a brand new studio mere days after being ousted from Infinity Ward seems more than a little suspect. Not to mention that West and Zampella didn't exactly have a rosy history with EA prior to this incident, considering that Infinity Ward was created as a result of a mass exodus of staffers (including West and Zampella) from the EA-owned developer 2015, Inc. As such, it is kind of hard to believe they would just jump at the chance to work for EA, even after this incident with Activision....especially after this incident with Activision.

This isn't to say that Activision is necessarilly innocent. Infact, it is quite possible, if not likely, that they really did refuse to pay royalties that West and Zampella (as well as the rest of Infinity Ward) deserved. But even if that is true, it is also possible that West and Zampella are trying to use that fact to try and hide any contacts they might have had with EA during their time in Infinity Ward.

Due to Kotick's infamous statements and reputation, its easy to side with West and Zampella on this matter. However, the suspicious circumstances in which Respawn Entertainment was formed, combined with the e-mail Activision presented as evidence (while it is no hard evidence, I am not exactly buying the idea that it was "just a joke" either), indicate that this case isn't necessarilly as clear cut as many would like to believe.
 

Delusibeta

Reachin' out...
Mar 7, 2010
2,594
0
0
Tom Phoenix said:
Delusibeta said:
Of course, considering THQ turned the pair away before they sealed the EA deal...

I am of the opinion that Activision is talking out of their arse in this case.
The thing is, who is to say the two didn't fake interest in THQ's offer, just so they could have "proof" that they weren't in secret talks with EA, and actually intended to go to EA all along? West and Zampella probably aren't dumb. If they were indeed in talks with EA while they were still heads of Infinity Ward, chances are that they would try to cover their tracks.

No matter how you slice it, the fact that West and Zampella signed a deal with EA to form a brand new studio mere days after being ousted from Infinity Ward seems more than a little suspect. Not to mention that West and Zampella didn't exactly have a rosy history with EA prior to this incident, considering that Infinity Ward was created as a result of a mass exodus of staffers (including West and Zampella) from the EA-owned developer 2015, Inc. As such, it is kind of hard to believe they would just jump at the chance to work for EA, even after this incident with Activision....especially after this incident with Activision.

This isn't to say that Activision is necessarilly innocent. Infact, it is quite possible, if not likely, that they really did refuse to pay royalties that West and Zampella (as well as the rest of Infinity Ward) deserved. But even if that is true, it is also possible that West and Zampella are trying to use that fact to try and hide any contacts they might have had with EA during their time in Infinity Ward.

Due to Kotick's infamous statements and reputation, its easy to side with West and Zampella on this matter. However, the suspicious circumstances in which Respawn Entertainment was formed, combined with the e-mail Activision presented as evidence (while it is no hard evidence, I am not exactly buying the idea that it was "just a joke" either), indicate that this case isn't necessarilly as clear cut as many would like to believe.
Had THQ agreed to relinquish IP rights, I firmly believe they would have signed Respawn. As for the time, it's easy to explain: these guys made Medal of Honour and Call of Duty. They have a mad track record: of course they would have been signed up rapidly. The rest of the post suggests you have been drinking the Activision branded Kool-Aid.
 

Tom Phoenix

New member
Mar 28, 2009
1,161
0
0
Delusibeta said:
Tom Phoenix said:
Delusibeta said:
Of course, considering THQ turned the pair away before they sealed the EA deal...

I am of the opinion that Activision is talking out of their arse in this case.
The thing is, who is to say the two didn't fake interest in THQ's offer, just so they could have "proof" that they weren't in secret talks with EA, and actually intended to go to EA all along? West and Zampella probably aren't dumb. If they were indeed in talks with EA while they were still heads of Infinity Ward, chances are that they would try to cover their tracks.

No matter how you slice it, the fact that West and Zampella signed a deal with EA to form a brand new studio mere days after being ousted from Infinity Ward seems more than a little suspect. Not to mention that West and Zampella didn't exactly have a rosy history with EA prior to this incident, considering that Infinity Ward was created as a result of a mass exodus of staffers (including West and Zampella) from the EA-owned developer 2015, Inc. As such, it is kind of hard to believe they would just jump at the chance to work for EA, even after this incident with Activision....especially after this incident with Activision.

This isn't to say that Activision is necessarilly innocent. Infact, it is quite possible, if not likely, that they really did refuse to pay royalties that West and Zampella (as well as the rest of Infinity Ward) deserved. But even if that is true, it is also possible that West and Zampella are trying to use that fact to try and hide any contacts they might have had with EA during their time in Infinity Ward.

Due to Kotick's infamous statements and reputation, its easy to side with West and Zampella on this matter. However, the suspicious circumstances in which Respawn Entertainment was formed, combined with the e-mail Activision presented as evidence (while it is no hard evidence, I am not exactly buying the idea that it was "just a joke" either), indicate that this case isn't necessarilly as clear cut as many would like to believe.
Had THQ agreed to relinquish IP rights, I firmly believe they would have signed Respawn. As for the time, it's easy to explain: these guys made Medal of Honour and Call of Duty. They have a mad track record: of course they would have been signed up rapidly. The rest of the post suggests you have been drinking the Activision branded Kool-Aid.
So beacuse I don't automatically assume that West and Zampella are innocent victims means that I am drinking Activision branded Kool-Aid? If you actually payed attention to my post, you would notice that I didn't say that Activision was innocent. Infact, this case could very well be just an example of Activision being oppressive towards their former employees. I just think that it's kind of, you know...hopelessly naive to think that Activision is automatically in the wrong simply for being Activision.

Yes, West and Zampella have a mad track record....but they also have a track record of disputes with major publishers. Again, they already worked with EA before and that didn't end up well. While I am sure EA was quite eager to grab them regardless, if West and Zampella are really innocent, don't you think they would at least somewhat hesitate to work again for a publisher they left to work for Activision in the first place? Plus, it often takes weeks, if not months, to negotiate any contract. Yet, these two established a brand new gaming studio with EA's full backing in a matter of days...Sorry, but that seems quite a bit convenient to be a mere coincidence (although, as I said, it very well could be).

As for THQ...well, now we will never know, will we? To be honest, had THQ made such an offer, we would have known for certain if West and Zampella were innocent or not. As it stands, the fact that they didn't means that the rejection from West and Zampella can be interpreted either way. It could be that they really did try and make a contract with THQ, but didn't like the terms and went to EA instead...or it could be that they knew they were going to get better terms with EA and just pretended that they were trying to make a deal with THQ.

I don't know. It's possible we won't ever completely know what happened between West/Zampella and Activision. But right now, I have reasons to doubt both sides.
 

Delusibeta

Reachin' out...
Mar 7, 2010
2,594
0
0
Tom Phoenix said:
Delusibeta said:
Tom Phoenix said:
Delusibeta said:
Of course, considering THQ turned the pair away before they sealed the EA deal...

I am of the opinion that Activision is talking out of their arse in this case.
The thing is, who is to say the two didn't fake interest in THQ's offer, just so they could have "proof" that they weren't in secret talks with EA, and actually intended to go to EA all along? West and Zampella probably aren't dumb. If they were indeed in talks with EA while they were still heads of Infinity Ward, chances are that they would try to cover their tracks.

No matter how you slice it, the fact that West and Zampella signed a deal with EA to form a brand new studio mere days after being ousted from Infinity Ward seems more than a little suspect. Not to mention that West and Zampella didn't exactly have a rosy history with EA prior to this incident, considering that Infinity Ward was created as a result of a mass exodus of staffers (including West and Zampella) from the EA-owned developer 2015, Inc. As such, it is kind of hard to believe they would just jump at the chance to work for EA, even after this incident with Activision....especially after this incident with Activision.

This isn't to say that Activision is necessarilly innocent. Infact, it is quite possible, if not likely, that they really did refuse to pay royalties that West and Zampella (as well as the rest of Infinity Ward) deserved. But even if that is true, it is also possible that West and Zampella are trying to use that fact to try and hide any contacts they might have had with EA during their time in Infinity Ward.

Due to Kotick's infamous statements and reputation, its easy to side with West and Zampella on this matter. However, the suspicious circumstances in which Respawn Entertainment was formed, combined with the e-mail Activision presented as evidence (while it is no hard evidence, I am not exactly buying the idea that it was "just a joke" either), indicate that this case isn't necessarilly as clear cut as many would like to believe.
Had THQ agreed to relinquish IP rights, I firmly believe they would have signed Respawn. As for the time, it's easy to explain: these guys made Medal of Honour and Call of Duty. They have a mad track record: of course they would have been signed up rapidly. The rest of the post suggests you have been drinking the Activision branded Kool-Aid.
So beacuse I don't automatically assume that West and Zampella are innocent victims means that I am drinking Activision branded Kool-Aid? If you actually payed attention to my post, you would notice that I didn't say that Activision was innocent. Infact, this case could very well be just an example of Activision being oppressive towards their former employees. I just think that it's kind of, you know...hopelessly naive to think that Activision is automatically in the wrong simply for being Activision.

Yes, West and Zampella have a mad track record....but they also have a track record of disputes with major publishers. Again, they already worked with EA before and that didn't end up well. While I am sure EA was quite eager to grab them regardless, if West and Zampella are really innocent, don't you think they would at least somewhat hesitate to work again for a publisher they left to work for Activision in the first place? Plus, it often takes weeks, if not months, to negotiate any contract. Yet, these two established a brand new gaming studio with EA's full backing in a matter of days...Sorry, but that seems quite a bit convenient to be a mere coincidence (although, as I said, it very well could be).

As for THQ...well, now we will never know, will we? To be honest, had THQ made such an offer, we would have known for certain if West and Zampella were innocent or not. As it stands, the fact that they didn't means that the rejection from West and Zampella can be interpreted either way. It could be that they really did try and make a contract with THQ, but didn't like the terms and went to EA instead...or it could be that they knew they were going to get better terms with EA and just pretended that they were trying to make a deal with THQ.

I don't know. It's possible we won't ever completely know what happened between West/Zampella and Activision. But right now, I have reasons to doubt both sides.
I think THQ's statement [http://www.wired.com/gamelife/2011/01/thq-respawn/] is very clear. There was one point that didn't get agreement, and that was on who owned the IP. Ultimately, that was what they wanted most of all. To quote Zap himself "As for the IP ownership, frankly, after what we?d just been through with Activision, owning the IP we were going to create was important to us. Unfortunately, THQ did not want to agree to that." As Team17 will tell you, to retain ownership of your IP will probably ensure profits for ages, and if it means having to deal with a publisher who screwed you over, so be it.

Again, the speed of which largely goes down to their track record. The fact that they nearly sealed one deal and managed to seal another in a similar time frame certainly testifies to that.

Ultimately, I'm surprised Bungie didn't get jumped on in a similar deal after Microsoft relinquished control of them. Certainly, the fact that Activision nabbed them mere days after aforementioned EA deal is equally as convenient.

One more thing: the e-mails in question are internal EA e-mails from DICE's marketing chief, sent to various EA big cheeses. Does make the joke theory more plausible, in my opinion.