Most Recent News on Certain Legal Issues

[Joanna]

First off, I would like to point out, that this whole court thing is relatively new news for me, although I am aware it has been an ongoing thing for decades.

To my question, before I get to longwinded
If PGI gets a verdict in favor, meaning they are allowed to use the unseen, on basis that (from my understanding) that HG has no claim because they in actuallity don't own the copyright over the unseen, would that verdict in favor, also mean, that HBS could use the Unseen? Just a bit confused and not really well savvy in legal matters.

Cheers

The original case while settled out of court resulted in not just losing the 'unseen' mechs, but eventually led to FASA closing up shop. Many of us have a very deep loathing of HG and would love to see them counter sued into bankruptcy. While I don't agree with the direction PGI has taken MWO, I applaud their willingness to fight. Not only did they release the unseen, they also modified them (hopefully enough) to make them look similar to the originals, but hardly exact copies. Thus this might come down to proving their designs are different enough to not be copyright infringements (HG does not hold the copyright to the names). So for those of us who want the unseen, supporting PGI is valuable.

 

[Gwtheyrn]

I would expect this to be drawn out with PGI for another couple of years because of all the procedural issues including HG seeking assistance from a Japanese court against Big West.

While the court's decision is undoubtedly good news, the ultimate, final judgment on the Unseen is probably a ways off.

 

[AncientRaig]

I would expect this to be drawn out with PGI for another couple of years because of all the procedural issues including HG seeking assistance from a Japanese court against Big West.

While the court's decision is undoubtedly good news, the ultimate, final judgment on the Unseen is probably a ways off.

Well, I believe the court has told HG that they have until 5/4/2018 to provide evidence to support their claim or they're gonna rule in PGI's favor. It was posted here a page or two back IIRC.

 

[ED-209]

rule in PGI's favor

Incorrect. It would be a dismissal without prejudice. In other words, go away and come back when you have a case that is actually ready to go to trial. It would not be a ruling for or against, and it would not prevent HG from filing suit again.

 

[Gwtheyrn]

Well, I believe the court has told HG that they have until 5/4/2018 to provide evidence to support their claim or they're gonna rule in PGI's favor. It was posted here a page or two back IIRC.

Showing the issue currently tied up in Japanese courts would actually be cause for requesting and being granted an extension to that deadline, but it's ultimately up to the judge to decide whether to grant one or dismissal without prejudice.

 

[theliel]

Incorrect. It would be a dismissal without prejudice. In other words, go away and come back when you have a case that is actually ready to go to trial. It would not be a ruling for or against, and it would not prevent HG from filing suit again.

It's also only remove Does 1-10.

The real next phase is if the judge decides to quash HG's motion to bring in the Japanese witnesses. If that's the case things could go forward very quickly.

PGI is attempting to win on questions of law (HG has no standing) which are decided by the judge. If the judge thinks it's a question of fact whether HG has the license then it'll go to the jury.

Showing the issue currently tied up in Japanese courts would actually be cause for requesting and being granted an extension to that deadline, but it's ultimately up to the judge to decide whether to grant one or dismissal without prejudice.

It's not tied up in Japanese courts anymore, and as of the arbitration agreement entered into the US courts by HG last year it's not even a question anymore - HG stipulated in that arbitration finding (submitted to a Federal Court to enact/certify) that Big West owns the 41 designs/original drawings.

I'm not sure what HG would get out of their attempt, as PGI can always introduce the Japanese court findings & the arbitration agreement.

I hope there's a review by more of the actual copyright attorneys who can get the actual motions from pacer and review them, but from what I can see it doesn't look great for HG's case. It's never good to have any judge annoyed with you, let alone a federal one.

 

[AncientRaig]

It's not tied up in Japanese courts anymore, and as of the arbitration agreement entered into the US courts by HG last year it's not even a question anymore - HG stipulated in that arbitration finding (submitted to a Federal Court to enact/certify) that Big West owns the 41 designs/original drawings.

So then why hasn't this been dismissed yet? I'd think that if HG straight up admitted that they don't own it we'd be done with this then.

 

[ED-209]

If that's the case things could go forward very quickly.

"Quickly" being a relative term. I can't see much chance of the issue being resolved permanently such that HBS could include unseen in Battletech 2018 before support has ended and they have moved on to other things.

 

[Horseman]

I'm not a lawyer, but my understanding is as follows. If the case goes to trial, Harmony Gold have to prove two things; 1, that the "unseen" designs in MWO infringe on the Robotech designs, and 2, that HG actually have a legal right to those designs. Point 1 is pretty dicey to be honest, and may go against PGI. However, HG may end up having no basis by virtue of point 2. The real issue is that even if PGI win an initial verdict, HG will almost certainly appeal. And going back to point 2, the process to prove that, if granted by the court, could drag out for a year or more. In other words, this is going to be tied up for ages, and there's basically no hope for seeing unseen mechs in Battletech 2018. For future sequels? We'll have to wait and see.

Actually, #2 has to be proven before the case can go to trial. If HG fails to do so, the lawsuit gets dismissed with prejudice for lack of legal standing (and HG along with their counsel may be subject to legal and financial sanctions if the judge deems it appropriate). That's what PGI's counsel is currently going after.

Only once they've proven they have standing can they attempt to prove there was any infringement in the first place - which, given the precedent from FASA v Playmates, would be quite difficult to achieve.

Well, I believe the court has told HG that they have until 5/4/2018 to provide evidence to support their claim or they're gonna rule in PGI's favor. It was posted here a page or two back IIRC.

No. "Doe Defendants" stands for "We believe there are other parties that may be included in this lawsuit as defendants, but do not know who they are right now, so we leave a placeholder for them to be included". What the judge is telling HG is that they have until 5/4 to prove such parties exist, or he will remove their ability to include them in this lawsuit.

 

[pmaura]

I wish hbs would counter sue for law fees and then add the unseen in. People need to stand up to hg. Heres to pgi winning.

 

[Camicon Dachass]

I wish hbs would counter sue for law fees and then add the unseen in. People need to stand up to hg. Heres to pgi winning.

Companies dealing very closely with IPs, like HBS, typically have legal counsel on retainer, and good legal council will pay for itself through the money it saves you. Recouping legal fees might be nice, but that's unlikely and not particularly warranted considering nothing has gone to court yet.

Adding the Unseen will hinge on whether or not PGI wins their lawsuit, and the "terms", so to speak, of said winning. A best case scenario would be a ruling which affirms that HG does not have any copyright claim over the Unseen, which would allow HBS to include the Unseen without having to worry overmuch about HG taking them to court.

 

[jayof9s]

I wish hbs would counter sue for law fees and then add the unseen in. People need to stand up to hg. Heres to pgi winning.

Since it was dismissed with prejudice by agreement between HBS and HG, they can't. This is probably too much speculating on my part but: my guess is they decided it's easier to accept an out from the case and write off their incurred legal fees against the income that's about to go on their books from the game, rather than let the case potentially be strung along for months or years all while paying legal fees with the HOPE to get those fees back. Even if they win in the end, there would be no guarantee they would get reimbursed those legal fees so taking the 'win' now seems like the better solution. Especially since you can never really predict the outcome of a case if it goes to trial.

 

[Gwtheyrn]

It's also only remove Does 1-10.

The real next phase is if the judge decides to quash HG's motion to bring in the Japanese witnesses. If that's the case things could go forward very quickly.

PGI is attempting to win on questions of law (HG has no standing) which are decided by the judge. If the judge thinks it's a question of fact whether HG has the license then it'll go to the jury.



It's not tied up in Japanese courts anymore, and as of the arbitration agreement entered into the US courts by HG last year it's not even a question anymore - HG stipulated in that arbitration finding (submitted to a Federal Court to enact/certify) that Big West owns the 41 designs/original drawings.

I'm not sure what HG would get out of their attempt, as PGI can always introduce the Japanese court findings & the arbitration agreement.

I hope there's a review by more of the actual copyright attorneys who can get the actual motions from pacer and review them, but from what I can see it doesn't look great for HG's case. It's never good to have any judge annoyed with you, let alone a federal one.

Fair enough. I'm not a copyright attorney, much less everyone's favorite .

 

[theliel]

So then why hasn't this been dismissed yet? I'd think that if HG straight up admitted that they don't own it we'd be done with this then.

That's what PGI is doing. Welcome to the Speed of Law.

"Quickly" being a relative term. I can't see much chance of the issue being resolved permanently such that HBS could include unseen in Battletech 2018 before support has ended and they have moved on to other things.

Yeah, I mean, if this case is resolved by Jan 2019 it'll be a speedrun.

 

[Delta Assault]

BattleTech: 31st Century Legal Combat

 

[pmaura]

BattleTech: 31st Century Legal Combat

This post for the win

 

[Catapult]

Since it was dismissed with prejudice by agreement between HBS and HG, they can't. This is probably too much speculating on my part but: my guess is they decided it's easier to accept an out from the case and write off their incurred legal fees against the income that's about to go on their books from the game, rather than let the case potentially be strung along for months or years all while paying legal fees with the HOPE to get those fees back. Even if they win in the end, there would be no guarantee they would get reimbursed those legal fees so taking the 'win' now seems like the better solution. Especially since you can never really predict the outcome of a case if it goes to trial.

You seem to assume that the words "without an award of fees or costs" are meant as beneficial to the makers of BATTLETECH. The timing of this change of heart and that the document is written by He-who-must-not-be-named could instead mean that He-who-must-not-be-named wants to protect himself. Otherwise the makers of BATTLETECH could sue for damages, as some did not buy the game because of legal uncertainty, missing features and whatnot?

 

[Horseman]

You seem to assume that the words "without an award of fees or costs" are meant as beneficial to the makers of BATTLETECH. The timing of this change of heart and that the document is written by He-who-must-not-be-named could instead mean that He-who-must-not-be-named wants to protect himself. Otherwise the makers of BATTLETECH could sue for damages, as some did not buy the game because of legal uncertainty, missing features and whatnot?

I think that not giving HBS back their legal costs is the most damage HG could do without bringing their claim into trial - which they had a high probability of losing and incurring rule 11 sanctions (which I'm told could result in their lawyers getting disbarred)

 

[Hasler]

Probably was not a settlement since it was dropped with prejudice.

I think that not giving HBS back their legal costs is the most damage HG could do without bringing their claim into trial - which they had a high probability of losing and incurring rule 11 sanctions (which I'm told could result in their lawyers getting disbarred)

Disbarred would be beyond extreme for rule 11, but they would most likely be saddled with all of HBS's legal fees.
Under the standard American rule of litigation each party pays its own fees unless there is a fee shifting statute or misconduct(rule 11).

 

[jayof9s]

You seem to assume that the words "without an award of fees or costs" are meant as beneficial to the makers of BATTLETECH. The timing of this change of heart and that the document is written by He-who-must-not-be-named could instead mean that He-who-must-not-be-named wants to protect himself. Otherwise the makers of BATTLETECH could sue for damages, as some did not buy the game because of legal uncertainty, missing features and whatnot?

My post assumed it was more beneficial to HBS than continuing to trial because they agreed to it and people have been asking why they would do that. They weren't forced to accept it but yes, I also assume it was beneficial to the other party since they ALSO agreed to it, even though I didn't spell that out.

Yes, things could have potentially gone a lot better if they went to trial. Things could have also potentially gone a lot worse. Or the same but with additional months/years of legal fees. I'm not saying it was the best possible response ever, but likely the most reasonable business decision based on the situation.