4 ms·
It was very much mutual. Mojang seemed to have been of the understanding that they paid for more than just the work done and the right to use the poem in the ag
by 3np 4y ago
It was very much mutual. Mojang seemed to have been of the understanding that they paid for more than just the work done and the right to use the poem in the agreed initial release of the game, which was a major misunderstanding on their part. IP transfer was not part of the agreement.
It is what it is, everyone involved probably learned some form of lesson, and I don't see why we need to create villains or victims in this story.
More fundamentally, it takes two to tango. Just because the perspective of Mojang is the more common one in the industry doesn't make it the more "correct" interpretation. It's very much a two-way street and it's on both parties to make sure they understand each other when things are not explicitly spelled out and agreed upon.
- cmeacham98 4y agoThe author never attempts to communicate they didn't want to transfer the IP. I believe that if the author told Mojang "I don't want to sign this contract, I'll give you a license to use the poem instead." that Notch would have been entirely open to that - after all, that is the deal they had with C418. Mojang, at a minimum, paid for a license to use the poem in the game. They wanted to have this on paper because it would make the deal with Microsoft easier, but they would have been right about that fact either way. The author, on the other hand, believes they are in a situation where Microsoft has no right to use the End Poem despite the fact they accepted $20k for it.