Bethesda Tries Again in Fallout Online Legal Battle

Andy Chalk

One Flag, One Fleet, One Cat
Nov 12, 2002
45,698
1
0
Bethesda Tries Again in Fallout Online Legal Battle


Bethesda Softworks has reportedly filed a "motion in limine" to prevent Interplay from presenting potentially harmful evidence in the jury trial phase of the Fallout Online lawsuit.

First things first: Duck and Cover forums [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Motion_in_limine], where word is that Bethesda has filed just such a motion in its litigational slamdance with Interplay over the Fallout Online MMO.

Here's the relevant bit:

For the reasons set forth in the accompanying memorandum, Bethesda moves the Court for an order:


(1) Holding that Defendant/Counter-Plaintiff Interplay Entertainment Corp. ("Interplay") bears the burden of proof at trial on each of the following issues: (a) that Interplay has a trademark and copyright license; (b) that Interplay had commenced "full-scale development of its FALLOUT MMOG" by April 4, 2009 as set forth in Section 2.3 of the Trademark License Agreement entered into by Bethesda and Interplay on April 4, 2007 (the "TLA"); and (c) that Interplay had "secured financing for the FALLOUT MMOG in an amount no less than US$30,000,000.00" by April 4, 2009 as set forth in Section 2.3 of the TLA;
(2) Precluding Interplay from offering parol evidence [Wikipedia!] to support its defense that the TLA granted Interplay a copyright license;
(3) Precluding Interplay from arguing at trial that it had satisfied the "full-scale development" and "Minimum Financing" requirements set forth in Section 2.3 of the TLA by April 4, 2009; and
(4) Precluding Interplay from amending its pleadings to assert the affirmative defense of mistake.



It's times like this that I wish I had a lawyer lying around in a drawer somewhere, because to my eyes it looks like Bethesda wants the court to assert that the burden of proof is on Interplay and at the same time deny Interplay the means to meet that burden. If so, and if it works, it's an unquestionably brilliant tactic, but I think I actually prefer the likelihood that I'm wildly misinterpreting things. Can this actually work? I suppose it "can," at least in theory, or else Bethesda's lawyers wouldn't have bothered, but I have a hard time seeing any realistic likelihood that this is going to fly.





Permalink
 

asinann

New member
Apr 28, 2008
1,602
0
0
That looks to me like Bethesda is trying to prevent Interplay from proving that they have in fact satisfied their contractual obligations by just making sure they can't present the evidence that would prove it.

In other words, they wouldn't be able to prove it because all evidence that could prove it would be declared inadmissible.

Section 1 states that Interplay would have to prove that they secured financing, had a contract and all that jazz, while the other 3 sections specifically prevent them from doing so.
 

Dahaka27

New member
Apr 20, 2009
101
0
0
They must be getting desperate now if they are trying to force interplay to withold evidence.
 

Vault Citizen

New member
May 8, 2008
1,703
0
0
Gosh darn it (not sure if I can say what I really want to here), Bethesda for crying out loud, stop suing people and please, please let this game happen, I don't know how fan opinion is towards this game over all but I doubt very many people will thank you.

Its very annoying that they are the people behind Skyrim and the current state of Fallout or it would be easy to walk away from the company at this point (not that I believe my doing so would contribute in any way to anything)
 

Mrmac23

New member
Aug 12, 2011
213
0
0
Goddamnit Bethesda, stop acting like you're on the verge of bankruptcy. We all know that they're going to get an absolute fuckton of money from Skyrim, they can stop trying to sue everyone now.
 

seraphy

New member
Jan 2, 2011
219
0
0
I am getting seriously tired about Bethesda legal nonsense. Why won't they just leave other people alone already.

I am almost starting to hope that Bethesda would lose Fallout license back to interplay, even if that would mean we would never see another fallout game anymore.
 

ChildofGallifrey

New member
May 26, 2008
1,095
0
0
Mrmac23 said:
Goddamnit Bethesda, stop acting like you're on the verge of bankruptcy. We all know that they're going to get an absolute fuckton of money from Skyrim, they can stop trying to sue everyone now.
Maybe they need the absolute fuckton of money from Skyrim to pay their extensive legal bills?
 

vxicepickxv

Slayer of Bothan Spies
Sep 28, 2008
3,126
0
0
Wouldn't it have just been easier for Zanimax, the company that owns Bethesda to just buy Interplay by now?
 

Keith Reedy

New member
Jan 10, 2011
183
0
0
Bethesda is not going to lose the Fallout License. They don't want Interplay to make the MMO thats why they are doing this, they don't care if they win the case. They are using the legal system to financially rape the already weak Interplay. Most likely it will work too.

Why should the license be left with Interplay the people who made all that companies good memorable games have moved on. Its a dieing shell of a studio that has contributed nothing of note in recent memory. Even if Bethesda leaves them alone its doubtful they will ever actually make the game. Even less likely they will make it a good game.
 

oplinger

New member
Sep 2, 2010
1,721
0
0
..Guys, this started back in 2009. It's not like Bethesda is out just tossing out lawsuits at everyone right now

If I wanted someone to do some work, and they went "okay" and took my money and did nothing...I'd be kind of upset too. No matter how much money I rake in just by being awesome.

They only got funding and started development 2 days before the contract told them to do so. So Bethesda is upset they weren't in "full scale" development within 2 days.

I'm not rooting for Bethesda though. I hope they lose, but the lawsuit is not new, and I think it deserves court time at least.
 

Lt. Vinciti

New member
Nov 5, 2009
1,285
0
0
Keith Reedy said:
Bethesda is not going to lose the Fallout License. They don't want Interplay to make the MMO thats why they are doing this, they don't care if they win the case. They are using the legal system to financially rape the already weak Interplay. Most likely it will work too.

Why should the license be left with Interplay the people who made all that companies good memorable games have moved on. Its a dieing shell of a studio that has contributed nothing of note in recent memory. Even if Bethesda leaves them alone its doubtful they will ever actually make the game. Even less likely they will make it a good game.
Thank you.

Best Statement Ive ever read on these forums... Interplay is dead....They sold Fallout and now Bethesda owns it...They have lost and Interplay is a dying star...its time to give up and find yourselves some real jobs...perhaps Bethesda will take your good people...and Obsidian too
 

seraphy

New member
Jan 2, 2011
219
0
0
Keith Reedy said:
Bethesda is not going to lose the Fallout License. They don't want Interplay to make the MMO thats why they are doing this, they don't care if they win the case. They are using the legal system to financially rape the already weak Interplay. Most likely it will work too.

Why should the license be left with Interplay the people who made all that companies good memorable games have moved on. Its a dieing shell of a studio that has contributed nothing of note in recent memory. Even if Bethesda leaves them alone its doubtful they will ever actually make the game. Even less likely they will make it a good game.
You answered your second paragraph question in first paragraph. What are Bethesda here but huge cyper pullies. I have no particular wish to support such behaviour.

But obviously you are right, Bethesda will lawsuit interplay to oblivion, and we get no change to see if Interplay could make anything decent.
 

Keith Reedy

New member
Jan 10, 2011
183
0
0
seraphy said:
Keith Reedy said:
Bethesda is not going to lose the Fallout License. They don't want Interplay to make the MMO thats why they are doing this, they don't care if they win the case. They are using the legal system to financially rape the already weak Interplay. Most likely it will work too.

Why should the license be left with Interplay the people who made all that companies good memorable games have moved on. Its a dieing shell of a studio that has contributed nothing of note in recent memory. Even if Bethesda leaves them alone its doubtful they will ever actually make the game. Even less likely they will make it a good game.
You answered your second paragraph question in first paragraph. What are Bethesda here but huge cyper pullies. I have no particular wish to support such behaviour.

But obviously you are right, Bethesda will lawsuit interplay to oblivion, and we get no change to see if Interplay could make anything decent.
Yeah I noticed I did that after I posted. I like Bethesda games but the legal team is arse they are very unkind. I don't think Interplay would have put out anything good. Bethesda sees that Interplay is dieing and fears that they may release a crappy MMO that people would buy cuz its fallout and tarnish the License. I understand this but they could be nicer about it.
 

Tortilla the Hun

Decidedly on the Fence
May 7, 2011
2,244
0
0
"Your honor, I ask that the plaintiff not show any of their evidence."

"And why is that?"

"Because that evidence will destroy my case!!"
 

Keith Reedy

New member
Jan 10, 2011
183
0
0
Mortis Nuncius said:
"Your honor, I ask that the plaintiff not show any of their evidence."

"And why is that?"

"Because that evidence will destroy my case!!"
Do you think Interplay would make a good game or even manage to release it even if Bethesda left them alone. I doubt it, making and maintaining and MMO is expensive and Interplay is almost financially dead. They haven't made any games in recent memory
 

Therumancer

Citation Needed
Nov 28, 2007
9,909
0
0
To be entirely honest, I'd imagine there is more here than we're seeing. Chances are the court wouldn't agree to hear the case and prevent one side from presenting evidence on it's own. Without the full information availible about what was used by Interplay in court, it's impossible for me to judge things.

That said from the way how this sounds, "Parol" evidence is Interplay claiming that due to OTHER agreements made with Bethesda outside of the specific contract being discussed, which were never formalized AFTER this contract came into force they aren't in violation of the agreement they made with Bethesda.

Bethesda is saying that the contract as it's written should stand, as it was the last word in the negotiations and what they all agreed to. Any side deals that were never formalized and signed too are irrelevent.

When the contract was first drawn up, things were probably pretty friendly, and Interplay probably had witnesses and other documents/memos pertaining to discussions. Bethesda probably didn't realize it was going to want it's liscence back this way, and promised Interplay a great deal of leeway with the specifics of the contract in order to get it signed. Information that Interplay can provide.

In court Interplay is probably saying "well yeah, we are in violation of the agreement, but I have these recordings of conversations, and letters from these guys making the spirit of the deal sound very differant, and we only agreed because this was our actual understanding" which is leading to sympathy from the courts.

Bethesda basically wants to be hardcore about it, the old "if it's not in writing, it doesn't count" stance. It wants a trial under the terms of the contract that was signed without Interplay being able to present all of this evidence that should be non-binding in support of their position to garner sympathy.

Don't get me wrong, it's a very rat-like thing to do, especially if there WERE side deals cut in good faith that were never formalized, and chances are if Interplay is winning on terms of sympathy.

Strictly speaking even in the worst case this just means they will be following the contract.

-

Contract law was NOT my major area of study when I was in school for Criminal Justice. A point to consider though is that there ARE laws that protect people from contracts that are intentionally misleading. Things like length, complexity, and similar things can come into play which is why most serious contracts have multiple people signing off on them including one or two notaries who witness the terms and everyone's understanding of the terms so they can be called in during later disputes.

The final point... #4, seems to imply that Interplay is using a defense similar to this claiming that they signed the contract by mistake, probably due to all of these side discussions they can prove which were never formalized within the contract.

So basically Bethesda is saying "they need to be held to the contract, can't say there were mistaken, and anything else that was said should be considered irrelevent to the letter of the contract". Very ratlike under the circumstances, but a bit differant than what some people seem to be thinking.


I could be entirely wrong, but this is my understanding, hopefully it helped SOME people, or if I'm wrong someone who knows more about this area of law can explain it better.
 

Skizle

New member
Feb 12, 2009
934
0
0
seraphy said:
Keith Reedy said:
Bethesda is not going to lose the Fallout License. They don't want Interplay to make the MMO thats why they are doing this, they don't care if they win the case. They are using the legal system to financially rape the already weak Interplay. Most likely it will work too.

Why should the license be left with Interplay the people who made all that companies good memorable games have moved on. Its a dieing shell of a studio that has contributed nothing of note in recent memory. Even if Bethesda leaves them alone its doubtful they will ever actually make the game. Even less likely they will make it a good game.
You answered your second paragraph question in first paragraph. What are Bethesda here but huge cyper pullies. I have no particular wish to support such behaviour.

But obviously you are right, Bethesda will lawsuit interplay to oblivion, and we get no change to see if Interplay could make anything decent.
Interplay would have done nothing with it anyways. We would have seen screenshots, game play footage, and even a few bits about the story, but Interplay will cancel it and sell the license off to someone...Oh wait a tick...
 

Something Amyss

Aswyng and Amyss
Dec 3, 2008
24,759
0
0
Mortis Nuncius said:
"Your honor, I ask that the plaintiff not show any of their evidence."

"And why is that?"

"Because that evidence will destroy my case!!"
"I'm going to allow it."

...I could see it happening.
 

Trishbot

New member
May 10, 2011
1,318
0
0
Glad we could settle this like gentlemen.

Next up, the lawsuit against Minecraft's creator. That should go just as well.

"Your honor, I present my case. "Scrolls" and "The Elder Scrolls V: Skyrim"."

"... Is... is that your entire case? They used the same common name in parts of their title?"

"What more do you need? We would have sued Skyward Sword too, but Nintendo actually had money to fight back. We're hoping the 3DS tanks... then just you wait."

"You... you are just terrible people. Case dismissed."