5 ms·

We DMCA-ed our own game because it got hijacked by publisher

139 points by Reedx 8y ago

benj111 8y ago
This seems like the wrong tool for the job. They seem to have good reasons for doing what they did. So I don't fault them, but this should be a contract dispute/fraud.
- davweb 8y ago
  > We took legal action, they ignored attorney's demand to return our app id. Can't afford to escalate further because we're already few months in debt. We are 100% in the correct side of the law and had full rights. But nothing could be done. It seems they tried that route but then resorted to DMCA when the money for lawyers ran out.
- rflrob 8y ago
  The developer seems to agree, “The law defaults to letting them get away unless you can pay several year worth of salaries and wait several months”. But when you’re out of other options, you do what you can.
- klodolph 8y ago
  Isn’t it the contract which gives the publisher rights to publish the game? If the publisher hasn’t executed their side of the contract, wouldn’t that mean that they don’t have rights to the game? DMCA sounds like an appropriate tool, then. From what I understand, the way a breached contract gets handled varies a lot from jurisdiction to jurisdiction, and I’m no expert.
  - benj111 8y ago
    The publisher is UK based, as far as I'm aware contract law is somewhat similar in the US. The DMCA isn't against the publisher as I understand, its against the sites actually selling the game.
    - klodolph 8y ago
      > The DMCA isn't against the publisher as I understand, its against the sites actually selling the game. Well, yes, that's how DMCA takedown notices work. If Lex Luthor posts my video on YouTube, I don't send the DMCA takedown notice to Lex Luthor, I send the DMCA takedown notice to YouTube. Lex Luthor has no responsibility to accept DMCA takedown notices, and there's no way to send them to him. The sequence is (1) publisher breaches contract (2) developer voids contract in response (3) publisher no longer has right to distribute game (4) DMCA takedown notice. This makes sense to me, but again, I'm not a legal expert and I'm willing to entertain arguments. I feel like the only thing in question here is whether the contract was voided properly, and whether it could be voided in the first place.
      - benj111 8y ago
        My point is, is that the publisher isn't involved in the prices at all, which as they are the wrong doer suggests to me that this is indeed the wrong tool. Its like Superman going after Lex Luther's office supplier, rather than destroying his underground lair.
        klodolph 8y ago
        I think you may misunderstand what a DMCA takedown notice is, or how they are used. You send DMCA takedown notices to innocent parties, that's how they work, that's how they're designed to work, that's the only way they work at all. If you want to send something to a guilty party then you send a lawsuit instead. You can't send a DMCA takedown notice to Lex Luthor's office supplier, because the office supplier doesn't claim DMCA safe harbor. YouTube does, Steam does, so you can send DMCA takedown notices to Steam and YouTube. You can't send DMCA takedown notices to Lex Luthor, his office supplier, or the publisher at fault here. In effect, the DMCA takedown notice is just a way of telling YouTube, "Lex Luthor does not have the rights to this video." This is not going after YouTube in any meaningful way. This is exactly what the DMCA is designed to do... prevent YouTube or Steam from being targets of lawsuits. Because Steam accepts DMCA takedown notices, they are protected from certain lawsuits for copyright infringment. DMCA takedown is a process where you tell Steam about third-party copyright infringement, and they remove the content and this clears Steam of liability. When Lex Luthor posts my video on YouTube, I can do two things: I can send a DMCA to YouTube and I can sue Lex Luthor. Suing Lex Luthor is expensive, so I start with the DMCA takedown notice to YouTube.
- Chazprime 8y ago
  It appears to have been the developers only option as the legal route to resolving the problem would cripple them financially. So perhaps not the right tool, but certainly an effective one.
jedberg 8y ago
Steam/Valve has a great PR opportunity here. They could pay out all the money to the indie developer and then use their legal might to sue the publisher to recover the stolen funds.
- FireBeyond 8y ago
  That would come perilously close to tortious interference. They would have no standing to do so, any more than withholding your funds because you didn't pay your rent.
  - JaimeThompson 8y ago
    Couldn't the developer contract with Valve to allow that to happen?
    - throwaway2048 8y ago
      the contract is almost certainly with the publisher, not the developer.
  - jedberg 8y ago
    Their standing would come from the fact that they had to refund the indie developer and therefore are now in need of funds to cover that expense incurred because of the publishers actions.
    - FireBeyond 8y ago
      Any competent attorney (and realize that not for one moment do I have any sympathy for the publisher, who sounds like a complete garbage person) would turn around and say "You had no obligation to do so, and your desire to do so for PR purposes or otherwise in no way creates an obligation for me to reimburse you". And legally, they'd be entirely right.
Reedx 8y ago
Here's the game in question: https://store.steampowered.com/app/505740/Eximius_Seize_the_Frontline/ https://store.steampowered.com/app/505740/Eximius_Seize_the_... And the announcement on Steam: https://steamcommunity.com/games/505740/announcements/detail/1699446873491336874 https://steamcommunity.com/games/505740/announcements/detail...
pkilgore 8y ago
Hey y'all. (At least in USA) ask for a provision awarding attorneys fees and costs to prevailing party in the event of a dispute over major contracts. Disputes happen less frequently, go faster, settle more often, and are easier to fund if necessary. Suspect parties that won't sign it (or at least discuss their reasons).
jiqiren 8y ago
I’m super confused on what a publisher does in this case. seems all they did was release on steam? Can’t any dev do the same? What was the purpose of the publisher? (Did I miss something?)
- simcop2387 8y ago
  Usually the publisher acts like a movie producer, in theory, they get all the marketing and distribution setup and usually also help either raise or provide initial funding for the venture. In this case it seems like they didn't do much at all.
ezoe 8y ago
Well, the right step outside of legal battle would be updating the game to say that the publisher doesn't pay up.

139 points by Reedx 8y ago

This seems like the wrong tool for the job. They seem to have good reasons for doing what they did. So I don't fault them, but this should be a contract dispute/fraud.

davweb 8y ago
> We took legal action, they ignored attorney's demand to return our app id. Can't afford to escalate further because we're already few months in debt. We are 100% in the correct side of the law and had full rights. But nothing could be done. It seems they tried that route but then resorted to DMCA when the money for lawyers ran out.
rflrob 8y ago
The developer seems to agree, “The law defaults to letting them get away unless you can pay several year worth of salaries and wait several months”. But when you’re out of other options, you do what you can.
klodolph 8y ago
Isn’t it the contract which gives the publisher rights to publish the game? If the publisher hasn’t executed their side of the contract, wouldn’t that mean that they don’t have rights to the game? DMCA sounds like an appropriate tool, then. From what I understand, the way a breached contract gets handled varies a lot from jurisdiction to jurisdiction, and I’m no expert.
- benj111 8y ago
  The publisher is UK based, as far as I'm aware contract law is somewhat similar in the US. The DMCA isn't against the publisher as I understand, its against the sites actually selling the game.
  - klodolph 8y ago
    > The DMCA isn't against the publisher as I understand, its against the sites actually selling the game. Well, yes, that's how DMCA takedown notices work. If Lex Luthor posts my video on YouTube, I don't send the DMCA takedown notice to Lex Luthor, I send the DMCA takedown notice to YouTube. Lex Luthor has no responsibility to accept DMCA takedown notices, and there's no way to send them to him. The sequence is (1) publisher breaches contract (2) developer voids contract in response (3) publisher no longer has right to distribute game (4) DMCA takedown notice. This makes sense to me, but again, I'm not a legal expert and I'm willing to entertain arguments. I feel like the only thing in question here is whether the contract was voided properly, and whether it could be voided in the first place.
    - benj111 8y ago
      My point is, is that the publisher isn't involved in the prices at all, which as they are the wrong doer suggests to me that this is indeed the wrong tool. Its like Superman going after Lex Luther's office supplier, rather than destroying his underground lair.
      - klodolph 8y ago
        I think you may misunderstand what a DMCA takedown notice is, or how they are used. You send DMCA takedown notices to innocent parties, that's how they work, that's how they're designed to work, that's the only way they work at all. If you want to send something to a guilty party then you send a lawsuit instead. You can't send a DMCA takedown notice to Lex Luthor's office supplier, because the office supplier doesn't claim DMCA safe harbor. YouTube does, Steam does, so you can send DMCA takedown notices to Steam and YouTube. You can't send DMCA takedown notices to Lex Luthor, his office supplier, or the publisher at fault here. In effect, the DMCA takedown notice is just a way of telling YouTube, "Lex Luthor does not have the rights to this video." This is not going after YouTube in any meaningful way. This is exactly what the DMCA is designed to do... prevent YouTube or Steam from being targets of lawsuits. Because Steam accepts DMCA takedown notices, they are protected from certain lawsuits for copyright infringment. DMCA takedown is a process where you tell Steam about third-party copyright infringement, and they remove the content and this clears Steam of liability. When Lex Luthor posts my video on YouTube, I can do two things: I can send a DMCA to YouTube and I can sue Lex Luthor. Suing Lex Luthor is expensive, so I start with the DMCA takedown notice to YouTube.
Chazprime 8y ago
It appears to have been the developers only option as the legal route to resolving the problem would cripple them financially. So perhaps not the right tool, but certainly an effective one.

jedberg 8y ago

Steam/Valve has a great PR opportunity here. They could pay out all the money to the indie developer and then use their legal might to sue the publisher to recover the stolen funds.

FireBeyond 8y ago
That would come perilously close to tortious interference. They would have no standing to do so, any more than withholding your funds because you didn't pay your rent.
- JaimeThompson 8y ago
  Couldn't the developer contract with Valve to allow that to happen?
  - throwaway2048 8y ago
    the contract is almost certainly with the publisher, not the developer.
- jedberg 8y ago
  Their standing would come from the fact that they had to refund the indie developer and therefore are now in need of funds to cover that expense incurred because of the publishers actions.
  - FireBeyond 8y ago
    Any competent attorney (and realize that not for one moment do I have any sympathy for the publisher, who sounds like a complete garbage person) would turn around and say "You had no obligation to do so, and your desire to do so for PR purposes or otherwise in no way creates an obligation for me to reimburse you". And legally, they'd be entirely right.

Reedx 8y ago

Here's the game in question: https://store.steampowered.com/app/505740/Eximius_Seize_the_Frontline/ https://store.steampowered.com/app/505740/Eximius_Seize_the_... And the announcement on Steam: https://steamcommunity.com/games/505740/announcements/detail/1699446873491336874 https://steamcommunity.com/games/505740/announcements/detail...

pkilgore 8y ago

Hey y'all. (At least in USA) ask for a provision awarding attorneys fees and costs to prevailing party in the event of a dispute over major contracts. Disputes happen less frequently, go faster, settle more often, and are easier to fund if necessary. Suspect parties that won't sign it (or at least discuss their reasons).

jiqiren 8y ago

I’m super confused on what a publisher does in this case. seems all they did was release on steam? Can’t any dev do the same? What was the purpose of the publisher? (Did I miss something?)

simcop2387 8y ago
Usually the publisher acts like a movie producer, in theory, they get all the marketing and distribution setup and usually also help either raise or provide initial funding for the venture. In this case it seems like they didn't do much at all.

ezoe 8y ago

Well, the right step outside of legal battle would be updating the game to say that the publisher doesn't pay up.