Activision Threatens EA For Agreeing To Publish Game Activision Dropped

from the once-it's-dropped,-it-stays-dropped,-dammit dept

Mon, Feb 16th 2009 12:44pm — Mike Masnick

Reader Nick sends in the news of a story that reminds us of The Watchmen saga, whereby Fox got paid for doing nothing, while Warner Bros., who made the movie and took on all the risk, had to pay out. In this case, it involves a video game, Brutal Legend. The game was developed by a development studio named Double Fine, with an agreement by Vivendi Games to publish it. However, after Vivendi Games and Activision merged, the combined company decided to drop a bunch of projects, including Brutal Legend. So, Double Fine did what any development house would have done: went in search of another company to publish it. And it found one, in gaming giant EA.

Except, now, Activision has sent a nastygram to EA saying that it still owns the rights to publish Brutal Legend, and EA is infringing on those rights. Of course, Activision has still made it clear that it actually has no intention of releasing the game, which doesn't match with its current focus. Instead, this is a pretty clear money grab -- trying to get EA to pay up. EA seems to have a good response, though:

We doubt that Activision would try to sue. That would be like a husband abandoning his family and then suing after his wife meets a better looking guy.

Thank you for reading this Techdirt post. With so many things competing for everyone’s attention these days, we really appreciate you giving us your time. We work hard every day to put quality content out there for our community.

Techdirt is one of the few remaining truly independent media outlets. We do not have a giant corporation behind us, and we rely heavily on our community to support us, in an age when advertisers are increasingly uninterested in sponsoring small, independent sites — especially a site like ours that is unwilling to pull punches in its reporting and analysis.

While other websites have resorted to paywalls, registration requirements, and increasingly annoying/intrusive advertising, we have always kept Techdirt open and available to anyone. But in order to continue doing so, we need your support. We offer a variety of ways for our readers to support us, from direct donations to special subscriptions and cool merchandise — and every little bit helps. Thank you.

–The Techdirt Team

Filed Under: brutal legend, publishing, rights, video games
Companies: activision, double fine, ea

27 Comments

If you liked this post, you may also be interested in...

Reader Comments

Subscribe: RSS

View by: Time | Thread

Anonymous Coward, 16 Feb 2009 @ 1:01pm

Must be a left-wing, liberal, Obama-mama conspiracy. All of the teachers, journalists, game-developers, iPod-carriers, all of them -- left-wing, liberal, socialists, trying to take this country away from the right-wing, corporate-nanny, consumer-hating Nazis. HOW DARE YOUR OPINION DIFFER FROM MINE!

Just thought I'd throw that in -- before someone else does.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
About Time, 16 Feb 2009 @ 1:04pm

"We doubt that Activision would try to sue. That would be like a husband abandoning his family and then suing after his wife meets a better looking guy."

I love it! Between this and the RedRag story, it looks like the good guys are finally starting to make a stand.

Now... if we can only get a modern day tea party going regarding our (US) slip into socialism... Any ideas?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- wifezilla, 16 Feb 2009 @ 1:28pm
  
  Re: Tea Party
  http://captaincapitalist.blogspot.com/2008/11/time-for-new-tea-party.html
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - hegemon13, 16 Feb 2009 @ 1:36pm
    
    Re: Re: Tea Party
    Yeah, all of those are pretty stupid ideas. Good way to crash the economy in a hurry. Plus, they all address fairly legitimate taxes while ignoring the one ridiculous one: income tax. Cut off all those other taxes, and what do you think the government will do to income tax? Lower it? Gimme a break. Huckabee may have been a bit nuts in a lot of ways, but his tax plan was the best idea I've seen from a politician in, well, forever.
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
    - Anonymous Coward, 16 Feb 2009 @ 10:21pm
      
      Re: Re: Re: Tea Party
      And just how would these things crash the economy? If this wasn't satire, then it's the goddamn stupidest thing I've seen claimed. At least for today.
      [ link to this | view in chronology ]
      - hegemon13, 17 Feb 2009 @ 6:51am
        
        Re: Re: Re: Re: Tea Party
        Really? Perhaps some constructive points instead of "you're stupid" would give you a wee bit more credibility.
        
        The points in the article he linked to basically revolved around "don't buy stuff, and don't make any money." You don't see how that might have a negative effect on the economy, which revolves around both?
        
        Second, it doesn't solve the problem. The real problem is that willingness of the government to take your money and spend it. Get rid of wasteful spending (which encompasses a LOT more than just a silly project here or there), and that is an actual solution. Get involved and fight silly bills and projects. Go to work against the source of the problem. But, if you think that following the points in that article will actually make the government stop taxing, you are incredibly naive. They will just find other ways to get the money. In the end, income tax is the one place where taxes are completely involuntary and the government can dip in and take as much as it wants. If you cut off they're other sources of revenue, expect to see income tax skyrocket.
        
        I mentioned Huckabee simply because I agree with his philosophy of eliminating involuntary taxes, such as income tax and property tax, and raising voluntary ones, such as sales tax. Yes, it would crush the exconomy short-term, but the long-term benefits would be worth it.
        [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - Anonymous Coward, 16 Feb 2009 @ 1:41pm
    
    Re: Re: Tea Party
    Thanks wifezilla.
    
    That's good stuff, but I'm thinking a more proactive approach is in order. Why should we have to "hide" from the government's BS. We all forget that those douche bags work for us, not the other way around.
    
    How about this. We all take a year's worth of tax money and instead of paying the gov, we dump it in the San Franciso Bay. Then all the politicians and freeloaders can dive in after it. At least they'll earn it.
    
    And why San Francisco Bay? Sharks of course.
    
    Spread the word of this glorious event. Viva la revolution!!!
    
    PS, this is still on topic, right?
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - Anonymous Coward, 16 Feb 2009 @ 2:37pm
    
    Re: Re: Tea Party
    AMEN -- good read, thanks
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
- hegemon13, 16 Feb 2009 @ 1:31pm
  
  Re:
  I would hardly call EA a "good guy."
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
- MadJo (profile), 17 Feb 2009 @ 2:21am
  
  Re:
  This is the first time in a long time that EA is actually considered to be a 'good guy'. Well done EA. :)
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
Killer_Tofu (profile), 16 Feb 2009 @ 1:05pm

Heh
While I usually hate EA in general, I would side with them on this. I think their response is pretty funny too, so they get some points for that.

Taking a wider view, allowing such actions like Fox & Activision are pulling here creates a very very bad incentive in the marketplace.
It is saying that the large publishing companies can go around and sign every single deal they want to, and then just drop all of them they do not feel like releasing.
Then when somebody else likes the idea and goes to publish, they will get paid because they signed the initial agreement. Talk about horrible incentives. EA is very very much so in the right side on this, from just about every possible view (except maybe a poorly written law or the greedy jerks who stand to benefit).
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Anonymous Coward, 16 Feb 2009 @ 1:08pm

really?
ugh - why is that partnerships always end up going wrong? from a simple marriage to huge coorporate ventures. sad sad sad

:P
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Anonymous Coward, 16 Feb 2009 @ 1:09pm

screw EA & Activision.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
EAtaDick, 16 Feb 2009 @ 1:15pm

EA and Activision are like spies, bunch of whiny little bitches... (Love that, got it from the show Burn Notice)
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Anonymous Coward, 16 Feb 2009 @ 1:16pm

Divorce, what's that?
We doubt that Activision would try to sue. That would be like a husband abandoning his family and then suing after his wife meets a better looking guy.

More like the separated wife marrying a new husband without bothering to first get a divorce. Correct me if I'm wrong, but I think there may actually be laws against that sort of thing.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Chronno S. Trigger, 16 Feb 2009 @ 1:30pm
  
  Re: Divorce, what's that?
  More like a guy leaving his wife, not paying child support, never visiting, never helping out, and refusing to sign the divorce papers. At least in divorce there is a recourse for that.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - Anonymous Coward, 16 Feb 2009 @ 1:54pm
    
    Re: Re: Divorce, what's that?
    He doesn't have to "sign the divorce papers", the court can grant a divorce anyway. So what's your point?
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Anonymous Coward, 16 Feb 2009 @ 1:50pm
  
  Re: Divorce, what's that?
  Moreover, if the new husband knew that she was already married then he could be charged as well.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
Norm, 16 Feb 2009 @ 1:51pm

And the winners will be.....
...the Lawyers!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Lucretious, 16 Feb 2009 @ 2:21pm

what I like about the whole incident is that a suit dropped the whole pretentious corporate-speak and gave a verbal bitch-slap to the offending company.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
NIck (profile), 16 Feb 2009 @ 4:45pm

What are the details of this "arrangement"? Did Double Fine sell all of the IP to Vivendi Games? If they did, that is a bad move on Double Fine's part, unless that is standard practice in that industry. Otherwise, why would Double Fine seek a new publisher?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Anonymous Coward, 16 Feb 2009 @ 4:51pm

I actually kinda hope they go through with it and try to sue them.

EA is a giant. Activision has nowhere near the influence and money it once had. EA would crush them in court, and set a legal precedent on the GOOD side of copyright law for once.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Anonymous Coward, 16 Feb 2009 @ 6:40pm
  
  Re:
  "EA is a giant. Activision has nowhere near the influence and money it once had. EA would crush them in court, and set a legal precedent on the GOOD side of copyright law for once."
  
  Yeah, because we all know that it's not really the law that matters in court so much as how rich you are.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - Nick, 16 Feb 2009 @ 11:52pm
    
    Re: Re:
    Actually after merging with vivendi Activision is now the largest video game publisher in the world (Act was #3 Viv was #5) EA is now #2.
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
Dan Taylor, 17 Feb 2009 @ 7:00am

Wha?
This sounds something akin to Hellgate London's ongoing saga of Flagship Studios vs. Namco Bandai. Sadly, in the end, it's only the consumer who loses.

And EA's response? Classic. Well done folks!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Anonymous Coward, 17 Feb 2009 @ 7:28am

What's next. Not paying your taxes and getting to be Treasury Secretary?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
latoya shuck, 5 Oct 2010 @ 6:56am

To go with the anaolgy, I don't think it would be so likely for the husband to sue the better looking guy. It's a clear cut battle of egos here. Activision simply wants the right to maybe sometime go back to the old project, even though it prob wont. And when that prospect is threatened, AV feels insecure and frightened. Funny how personal dynamics are reflected in the corporate game development world.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]