Bethesda Claims Interplay Wants to "Undermine" Fallout

[Sinisterair]

How are they even making a MMO if they sold the rights of to Bethesda? If you sold the rights and IP you can fuck off its not yours anymore.

I'm not exactly sure how it worked, but I think there originally was a deal made and Bethesda let them make a fallout mmo. But I don't know the specifics of the deal, I think it was quite complicated. I'm sure someone else will no more about it.



I don't know what to think about the legal battle, I find it all very confusing. But I don't play mmos any way. Why can't Interplay say that the MMO is a "What if?" set in the Fallout universe?
If Zelda can have multiple time lines, why not Fallout.

Seconded, can someone in the know explain this. I think based on psat articles, they retained the rights to ONLY the title "Fallout Online" or something. Which is why they conceivably cant use "vaultboy" or any other fallout terminology. So who knows how their going to make a game...but technicly they could?

Basically there were a few requirements for Interplay to make the MMO,
1. Begin development Within 4yrs of the contract being signed
2. Raise enough money to Fund the project within those 4 years...30mil was required
3. Everything has to be checked with BethSoft or Zenimax before final development
....They didn't do any of these things, the original law suit is because BethSoft thinks Interplay is in Breach of Contract.....which in the eyes of the law...and signers of the contract they haven't held any part of there end of the deal, Interplay just needs to back the fuck off because obviously they haven't done what they were supposed to

I found the Exact artical
In November 2006, Interplay, headed by Herve Caen, filed a Form 8-K filing to the United States Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) regarding a potential Fallout massively multiplayer online game.[1]. In April 2007, Bethesda Softworks, the developer of Fallout 3, purchased full rights to the Fallout IP for $5.75 million USD. While Bethesda now owned the rights to the Fallout MMO IP as well, clauses in the purchase agreement state allowed Interplay to license the rights to the development of the MMO. [2] Specific requirements were stated in the agreement that if not met, Interplay would immediately lose and forfeit its license rights for Fallout. Development must have begun within 24 months of the date of the agreement (April 4, 2007), and Interplay must have secured $30 million within that time frame or forfeit its rights to license. Interplay would furthermore need to launch the MMOG within 4 years of the beginning of development, and pay Bethesda 12 percent of sales and subscription fees for the use of the IP.

Or if you want you can just read the wholeeee lawsuit

http://fallout.wikia.com/wiki/Bethesda_v._Interplay

 

[Starke]

Remember when Interplay turned out a "Fallout Trilogy" pack a couple years ago? This is an example of that problem in motion. The package was pulled and replaced (with, I think the "Classic Fallout" pack) because the average consumer would mistakenly believe that the Fallout Trilogy would be 1, 2 and 3, not 1, 2 and Tactics.

Little bit off topic but I actually have that pack, got it fairly recently too. Gamestop was holding a sale and it caught my eye, "New, Final Clearance: 7.99." I admit that "trilogy" threw me off a bit at first, but the packaging is fairly clear about it being 1,2, and tactics, really, the only way someone would think it was 1,2, and 3, would be someone who just looked at the title and bought it without looking at anything else. Honestly, if that's the way you're going to shop you deserve to be cheated like that IMO, but if enough people complained about this I can see how it would hurt the Fallout name.

Yeah, but you've also just defined the entire market for Asylum Films. You or I will catch that, [footnote]Hell, I actually like Tactics, so a bundle pack with that, without a disk check? I'm there.[/footnote] but what about your well meaning Aunt who doesn't know anything about Video Games, or worse someone new to gaming?

 

[Pandabearparade]

Most of the posts here are just fanboys of Bethesda agreeing with them because they liked Fallout 3, not because they know anything about who's legally in the right.

Full disclosure: Interplay sucks, I wouldn't want to play an MMO they make, and they likely will die off in the next year... but they're the ones in the right here. They had the rights to a Fallout MMO, and now Bethesda is trying to sue Interplay into submission because they can afford the lawyers and Interplay can't. It's petty, pathetic, childish, and will most likely work.

 

[UnravThreads]

Most of the posts here are just fanboys of Bethesda agreeing with them because they liked Fallout 3, not because they know anything about who's legally in the right.

Full disclosure: Interplay sucks, I wouldn't want to play an MMO they make, and they likely will die off in the next year... but they're the ones in the right here. They had the rights to a Fallout MMO, and now Bethesda is trying to sue Interplay into submission because they can afford the lawyers and Interplay can't. It's petty, pathetic, childish, and will most likely work.

But Bethesda are in the right. It's clear by what little progress we've seen that Interplay have not fulfilled their side of the bargain. Yes, Bethesda are being dicks about this. They're taking petty shots at Interplay to undermine them. But Bethesda aren't unjustified in what they're doing. Interplay clearly haven't done what they agreed to do, and as such are forfeit to legal proceedings. If a company currently making an MMO can't afford its own legal fees (As recent events clearly show, on top of Interplay's other debts), then it's not in a position to create, run and maintain the game.

Interplay will not come out of this in any fit state. It's just speeding up the inevitable. Interplay is a sham of a company run by two of the most infamous people in gaming (The Caen Brothers, responsible for the high quality title that was Superman 64), with no well known talent still left in its stable. When Black Isle was disbanded, Obsidian was formed. Brian Fargo went and formed inXile Entertainment, responsible for the Bard's Tale remake a few years back (Brian Fargo is one of the key people for that series) and the recent Hunted: The Demon's Forge, and others appeared in places such as BioWare and likely Bethesda.

 

[scott91575]

Both of these companies have made huge mistakes and are acting really childish. This all goes back to original contract(s) where Interplay sold their IP, but Bethesda was so anxious to get a hold of the Fallout IP they bought it with a huge loophole. That was big mistake #1. Bethesda made a huge assumption that Interplay would never be able to meet the stipulations. Since then, Interplay has done everything in their power to manipulate that loophole and stick up a middle finger to Bethesda. Like Rick James, Interplay is "a habitual line stepper." They have sold old games while tying them to Fallout 3, and ignored the contract requiring approval from Bethesda for how they sell their old games. Again, just horrible contract writing on Bethesda's part. They should have bought the old games, instead they make stipulations about how they can be sold. Yet Interplay should realize they need to get some approval from Bethesda, and from the sounds of it they simply ignored any communication with Bethesda.

Next, Interplay has proceeded with the MMO (in a very half assed manner), but from the sounds of it, have done everything they can to screw with the canon created by Bethesda. Instead of working within that framework and even working with Bethesda, they just went off on their own and did what they felt like. So now Bethesda is questioning all use of the Fallout IP outside of the name. Which of course begs the question, how do you allow a company to make a Fallout game and deny them everything about Fallout? This is the stuff the courts are wrestling with. What exactly did the contract allow Interplay to use? I think Bethesda is going too far in stating Interplay can only use the name, but Interplay keeps poking the dragon. Interplay could have probably avoided much of this by working with Bethesda. Bethesda could have avoided this by actually buying all the IP without such big loopholes. Now both are stubborn and they have to battle it out in court in order to figure out what exactly the first contract actually stipulated.

Yes, Bethesda is acting like a bully. Yet Interplay is also acting like a little child by doing everything in their power to screw with Bethesda and manipulate the contract as much as they can. Essentially, they sold their IP, got the cash, and now are acting like they never sold anything.

In the end, the original contracts were simply horrible, and the actions of both companies have made it worse. This will have to be decided in the courts, and one company will look like a huge fool.

 

[Desert Tiger]

Most of the posts here are just fanboys of Bethesda agreeing with them because they liked Fallout 3, not because they know anything about who's legally in the right.

Full disclosure: Interplay sucks, I wouldn't want to play an MMO they make, and they likely will die off in the next year... but they're the ones in the right here. They had the rights to a Fallout MMO, and now Bethesda is trying to sue Interplay into submission because they can afford the lawyers and Interplay can't. It's petty, pathetic, childish, and will most likely work.

Kinda funny how you're saying nobody knows anything about who's legally in the right. Did you happen to read the actual terms of the agreement? Here, another member graciously already posted it about two posts up from you:

Basically there were a few requirements for Interplay to make the MMO,
1. Begin development Within 4yrs of the contract being signed
2. Raise enough money to Fund the project within those 4 years...30mil was required
3. Everything has to be checked with BethSoft or Zenimax before final development
....They didn't do any of these things, the original law suit is because BethSoft thinks Interplay is in Breach of Contract.....which in the eyes of the law...and signers of the contract they haven't held any part of there end of the deal, Interplay just needs to back the fuck off because obviously they haven't done what they were supposed to

I found the Exact artical
In November 2006, Interplay, headed by Herve Caen, filed a Form 8-K filing to the United States Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) regarding a potential Fallout massively multiplayer online game.[1]. In April 2007, Bethesda Softworks, the developer of Fallout 3, purchased full rights to the Fallout IP for $5.75 million USD. While Bethesda now owned the rights to the Fallout MMO IP as well, clauses in the purchase agreement state allowed Interplay to license the rights to the development of the MMO. [2] Specific requirements were stated in the agreement that if not met, Interplay would immediately lose and forfeit its license rights for Fallout. Development must have begun within 24 months of the date of the agreement (April 4, 2007), and Interplay must have secured $30 million within that time frame or forfeit its rights to license. Interplay would furthermore need to launch the MMOG within 4 years of the beginning of development, and pay Bethesda 12 percent of sales and subscription fees for the use of the IP.

Or if you want you can just read the wholeeee lawsuit

http://fallout.wikia.com/wiki/Bethesda_v._Interplay

 

[Grouchy Imp_v1legacy]

Bethesda Softworks has filed a new motion for an injunction against Fallout Online, claiming that Interplay is trying to undermine the canon established in Fallout 3 [http://www.amazon.com/Fallout-3-Game-Year-Pc/dp/B002BXKJA0/ref=sr_1_3?ie=UTF8&qid=1307639073&sr=8-3] and beyond with non-canon work set in a different era.

Considering the liberties Bethesda took with original Fallout 1&2 canon when making 3, I find that a bit on the hypocritical side. Don't get me wrong, 3 was a great game, but it did f*ck about with established canon. That's the main overriding reason I cut F:NV so much slack - it tries to get the series back on track after Bethesda's 'homage'.

 

[NLS]

Wait - can someone really claim that undermining established continuity in a fictional setting is an offense worthy of a lawsuit?

That's baloney - and if it's not, let me be the first to suggest a class-action lawsuit against George Lucas.

George Lucas owns the rights to the Star Wars franchise, so you can't really sue him for doing bad things with it. Bethesda owns the Fallout Franchise now, so they can actually sue Interplay for undermining and misuse of their property.

 

[TornadoADV]

Honestly if interplay is doing that its pretty dickish of them. Bethesda made fallout 3, dont be sour and try to undermine it just because you were not allowed to make your own fallout 3. I'm with bethesda on this one.

Uh, they were allowed to make their own Fallout 3 (Obsidian Entertainment from Black Isle, the guys who made Fallout 2), it's called Fallout New Vegas. You know, the ACTUAL Fallout 3 that follows the Van Bueren design documents to nearly a T. But as previously stated these two Interplays are not the same and no pity should be felt for this Interplay.

 

[Kenko]

Brotherhood of Steel... Heck, I wanted to slit my wrists when I saw the trailer to that garbage. Fallout Tactics was a decent game, it wasnt bad imo. And the two first games are the best Turn-based RPG's ive played to date. While I disliked Fallout 3 for failing at the setting, I did love how it made the franchise more modernised. F:NV went back to Fallouts roots with its quirky humour and easter-eggs as well as making a more challanging game , I.E you are not Mr.Super McMuffin from the get go. Seriously, I wanted to rape Bethesda for makng Supermutants so patheticly weak and Power Armour useless. F3 was pretty non-canon on most things but had a decent story and setting but a poor execution of it.

Buuut back OT: Interplay of the past, we love you, but you are dead. Interplay of today? Fuck you, die in a fire you retards.

 

[SemiHumanTarget]

If it is a completely different genre of game, with a story that absolutely contradicts the established canon of the franchise, does it really deserve to carry the name of that franchise?

While perhaps not a deliberate attempt at undermining Bethesda's work, it seems clear as day that Interplay is trying to ride on the success of the Fallout name while pushing a completely different product. I won't go so far as to call that nefarious, but it's certainly dishonest.

I don't know what the legal precedent is here, but I would venture to guess that copyright law is a complicated, ugly beast. I wouldn't be surprised if Bethesda came out ahead on this one.

 

[Strazdas]

I'll boil it down to the facts.

1. Interplay is not the Interplay we knew. Don't mourn what may happen to this Interplay - They're not who you think they are.
2. Bethesda are being dicks, but not without reason.
3. Interplay are in no shape to create, finance and run an MMO. The amount they're borrowing and the frequency of their near-bankruptcies should make that clear.
4. Interplay sold the rights to Bethesda, and in Interplay's hands the Fallout franchise would undoutably either be lost to the mists of time or fail in a non-spectacular fashion.
5. Bethesda have, and will, continue to use the license for "good". Getting Obsidian (The remnants of the original developers for Fallout) to do New Vegas should be near enough proof of that.
6. Interplay needs to die. Now.

I happen to completely agree with this. Interplay was a great company. the key word is "was". it is nothing but a zombie now and has to go away.

 

[craddoke]

Wait - can someone really claim that undermining established continuity in a fictional setting is an offense worthy of a lawsuit?

That's baloney - and if it's not, let me be the first to suggest a class-action lawsuit against George Lucas.

George Lucas owns the rights to the Star Wars franchise, so you can't really sue him for doing bad things with it. Bethesda owns the Fallout Franchise now, so they can actually sue Interplay for undermining and misuse of their property.

I was just being silly with the George Lucas thing - mostly because I think Bethesda is being silly with their lawsuit (about this issue alone, mind - not other copyright infringement issues surrounding this MMO). You cannot prove to me that continuity matters or that the particulars of a fictional setting constitute "brand identity". This is grasping at straws, regardless of the Interplay's motives and Bethesda's rights to Fallout assets (which are completely different issues).

If Interplay has the rights to Fallout (an open question, of course), then it is ridiculous to argue that they can't write any story they want and call it Fallout (assuming they're not using assets for which they lack rights) even if the resulting story is complete crap and/or makes no sense in relation to Bethesda's work on Fallout.

 

[Chris^^]

well I'm unlikely to ever play the game, but as a Fallout fan I don't like the idea of them fucking over Fallout 3..

 

[Fusioncode9]

5. Bethesda have, and will, continue to use the license for "good". Getting Obsidian (The remnants of the original developers for Fallout) to do New Vegas should be near enough proof of that.

Prepare to be assaulted by a horde of people decrying your statement because apparently New Vegas should've never seen daylight.

Bugs be damned, Obsidian did a really good job on that one. Set a new bar to sandbox narratives.

It's not that New Vegas shouldn't have been released, just not yet. It needed a lot more testing.

 

[ChupathingyX]

Interplay is not the same and they need to go away.

That being said I do not support Bethesda, the only good thing they did was let Obsidian make New Vegas which was what Fallout 3 should've been.

Fallout 3 was like a kid who just found his dad's shotgun.

 

[INeedAName]

I'll boil it down to the facts.

1. Interplay is not the Interplay we knew. Don't mourn what may happen to this Interplay - They're not who you think they are.
2. Bethesda are being dicks, but not without reason.
3. Interplay are in no shape to create, finance and run an MMO. The amount they're borrowing and the frequency of their near-bankruptcies should make that clear.
4. Interplay sold the rights to Bethesda, and in Interplay's hands the Fallout franchise would undoutably either be lost to the mists of time or fail in a non-spectacular fashion.
5. Bethesda have, and will, continue to use the license for "good". Getting Obsidian (The remnants of the original developers for Fallout) to do New Vegas should be near enough proof of that.
6. Interplay needs to die. Now.

Wow, quick and accurate, kudos to you! I agree wholeheartedly with your assessment.

 

[INeedAName]

1. When Bethesda bought the Fallout franchise, Interplay retained the right to create an MMO and they should be allowed to do this. It doesn't matter if the same people don't work there and it doesn't matter if they are a completely different company - in the eyes of the law they are one and the same.
2. I agree to an extent, they obviously feel they are protecting their own investment but they should also either abide by their original agreement or create a new one in which they buy Interplay out of the MMO. Might be cheaper than legal fees.
3. It isn't really relevant whether or not Interplay is able to create and maintain an MMO (although previous rulings indicate that they are, in fact, well into the process of creation), they still have the right to do so.
4. Lost to the mists of time? That's a bit dramatic, especially when you can pick up both original Fallout titles on GOG or anywhere else online (which is also something Bethesda tried to prevent Interplay from doing). Even if you're correct, would it matter? Bethesda could have easily started their own post-apocalyptic franchise, but they decided to purchase the ability to use an established franchise for the purposes of name recognition and they allowed Interplay to retain the right to create an MMO. They didn't have to do that.
5. Since you surrounded the word good with quotation marks, I'll assume you mean 'good' is a matter of perspective. From Interplay's point of view, I imagine they also believe they are trying to make 'good' by the franchise.
6. I'm not clear on your last point - are you calling for the death of Interplay because they are in poor financial straights, they aren't making a product you want on the market, or both? If that were the litmus test for business, I can think of many companies who would have gone extinct long ago.

1: They rettained the right to make a Fallout MMO, but Bethesda bought the fallout universe, copyrighted material, story, characters etc. this means Interplay can create a Fallout MMO set in the fallout universe, but by the dictations and guidelines set by Bethesda, who owns the rights and content of that universe.
3er section 2.3 of the Trademark Licensing Agreement, a condition on Interplay's part was to have ?secured financing,? to develop a Fallout MMO.

 

[robinkom]

Just let it go. You sold the IP and you can't have it back

Oh they can have it back...for one BAZILLION DOLLARS!

Oh snap! Better sell off Earthworm Jim and a few first born children then!

 

[Aureliano]

(Youtube clips snipped)
Sorry but unleashing that abomination [BoS] on to the world is just unforgivable. Interplay had their chance with the Fallout franchise and they blew it out of the stratosphere. And I sincerely hope Bethesda does everything in their power to prevent another tragedy like that from occurring.

Edit: Looking through the thread I'm glad I'm not the only one who remembers Brotherhood of Steel. Never forget people. Never forget.

Ya know, I was initially going to side with Interplay on this considering that Black Isle created the fallout lore no matter who 'owns', in whatever legalese they want to put it, the rights to the game. But for purely practical reasons, BoS looked fucking terrible and there's no reason the people who made that game should be put in charge of making anything Fallout anymore.

That being said if it was OBSIDIAN versus Bethesda, then Bethesda could bite me regardless of who wanted to say they owned the rights to Fallout. But that's not the case here.