Just in: many news outlets report on Zenimax suing Oculus over misappropriation of trade secrets.
ArsTechnica has a good timeline of the "brawl" (too long to post here, but RTFA for it):
What started merely as strongly worded letters and back-and-forth accusations between Id Software parent company ZeniMax Media and VR headset maker Oculus has now turned into an actual legal case. ZeniMax today filed a federal lawsuit in the Northern Texas district accusing Oculus of misappropriation of trade secrets, copyright infringement, breach of contract, unfair competition, unjust enrichment, trademark infringement, and false designation.
In a statement, an Oculus spokesperson said "the lawsuit filed by ZeniMax has no merit whatsoever. As we have previously said, ZeniMax did not contribute to any Oculus technology. Oculus will defend these claims vigorously."
Popcorn, anyone?
(Score: 4, Insightful) by bucc5062 on Thursday May 22 2014, @04:10PM
When I saw this I had to check to be sure, this is the same company that Facebook just bought.
Fancy that.
Just after a $2B purchase some other company crawls out of the woodwork and cries foul, "we helped you" with the not so subtle "and we want some money too". Even if this suit has merit, how is it they waited till *now* to bring up the point that it was collaborative. had the sale not happen would Zenimax just continue on, not saying how much there were a part of the Rift's success?
Please.
My bet is that after some clucking and feather fluffing, these cocks will settle, like Zenimax really needs the money. God we are becoming idiots over f'ing Money.
The more things change, the more they look the same
(Score: 2) by monster on Thursday May 22 2014, @04:51PM
Yes, it looks like a money grabber and sour grapes. combined.
Also, misappropriation of trade secrets? There's no such thing. Either it's plain theft or it's not illegal, "trade secrets" haven't got any legal protection at all, that's what patents are for (and then they aren't secret anymore). Hiring employees who have experience in the field is not misappropriation either, unless they consider their brains as "company property".
(Score: 1, Informative) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday May 22 2014, @05:29PM
Wikipedia begs to differ. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trade_secrets#Curren t_regulation [wikipedia.org]
(Score: 2) by monster on Friday May 23 2014, @06:53AM
Ok, my comment was too categoric. Anyway, from the "Uniform Trade Secrets Act" page [wikipedia.org]:
Now, how does hiring an employee with specialized knowledge in the field fits in that definition? Unless he took code with him, it doesn't(*), and Carmack is no fool.
(*) Making "having worked in the same field" fit the definition would make 99% of technical employees unhireable.
(Score: 2) by elf on Thursday May 22 2014, @07:32PM
This started before FB took over so the FB money pit wasn't a motivation
The other interesting thing is Carmack said that he met someone who had a much better idea than he did and he dropped what he was doing. If this is true then I don't think Zenimax will have much of a case. I am sure with most of these court cases there is a lot from both sides we don't know.
I like both companies in this instance, I have much respect for ID and Bethesda as they have made some of my favorite games ever. But I see Oculus as a new innovator is a completely new space so I find it a shame that they are in the situation they are now...as someone else said...it will be popcorn time when this goes to court.
(Score: 3, Insightful) by Alfred on Thursday May 22 2014, @05:05PM
I would say that is the most common thing people become idiots over.
(Score: 2, Interesting) by RaffArundel on Thursday May 22 2014, @05:09PM
Yes, popcorn indeed. I have little hope that the Oculus Rift is going to be any good under the Facebook corporate machine - I'd rather just about ANY other company buy it.
What I gather from the Gamasutra summary (great additional link, IMO better than the Ars article) was Zenimax was working on getting a piece of the company when Facebook swooped in. My guess is that Zenimax wanted to much and offered too little. Zuck wrote a check, and "stole it out from under them". I'd be pissed too, regardless of merit.
Spin aside, there are some very interesting points in that document. I am curious how much support Zenimax gave and where they would be without Carmack.
Becoming? I think that ship sailed, shortly after we created ships....
(Score: 3, Insightful) by tibman on Thursday May 22 2014, @05:58PM
They might be a little pissed about losing Carmack as well. Claiming that everything he wrote, even during his free time, is their property is far fetched. Does that mean they own Armadillo Aerospace as well? I can see a non-compete clause preventing him from working against them but since they don't seem to actually have an HMD, i'll call BS on that too.
SN won't survive on lurkers alone. Write comments.
(Score: 3, Insightful) by RaffArundel on Thursday May 22 2014, @07:08PM
Agreed, and that is exactly what I thought they were doing before getting to see the filing. Taken with a healthy dose of "you know they are spinning things to make their case", Zenimax is claiming that they were more involved than simply letting him work Rift on the side. If (and that is a big IF) that is true, and they were in talks for deeper involvement, there is more merit than I thought. Granted that "merit" went from zero to a very small number.
As for the non-compete, there is also a claim of other people who quit at the same time and now work at Oculus. I have a generally low opinion on those types of agreements, but there is that. I don't recall anything about having/developing a HMD in-house, but they do claim the low latency and tracking technology was designed in-house. It is clear that they were interested in partnering/acquiring them.
I thought the Rift was going to be cool. Once they got bought by FB, I greatly lowered my expectations. Now I get to watch two companies I have no particular love for go at each other. It almost makes it interesting again.