27 ms·

Though I don't know all of the specifics of this case, there is more to consider than whether or not code was used. Certain types of algorithms, concepts, proc

Though I don't know all of the specifics of this case, there is more to consider than whether or not code was used. Certain types of algorithms, concepts, processes, etc. are possibly protectable and could fall under question. That being said, my sense is that Zenimax is having a bit of regret for not investing early and are trying alternative methods to get "their share".

georgemcbay 12y ago
From a legal perspective, yes, there are more things to consider. From a common sense perspective, ZeniMax AFAIK wasn't even working on VR at this time period other than Carmack dabbling in his own "free time", so this is a pretty naked attempt for them to make the claim that anything he worked on even remotely related to games is owned by them, which I have a huge issue with (even if it is a concept that holds legal water in some states). I'd have more sympathy for ZeniMax if they were bullish on VR and Carmack was working on an official project for them in the VR space and then left for another company, but this doesn't look like that at all, this looks like a game company owned by a lawyer trying to get a big payday on an opportunity they previously missed the boat on, using tenuous legal technicalities.
- stonemetal 12y ago
  As far as I know He is in Texas (Id is or was in Dallas). Does anyone know which way Texas leans on those issues? Either way DOOM 3 BFG was officially announced to support VR head sets, so he probably has worked with VR in some official capacity.
  - sillysaurus3 12y ago
    If Texas leans the wrong way, it must be challenged. It's ridiculous that Zenimax could possibly pull something like this with the full support of the law.
    - sdgsdgsdg 12y ago
      These are the ridiculous times we live in.
hosh 12y ago
That's my read as well: ZeniMax wants a piece of the action.
sdgsdgsdg 12y ago
I cannot understand the logic that could make this kind of contract enforceable. By this reasoning, the patent office employing Albert Einstein owned the theory of Special Relativity and presumably therefore a stake in subsequent commercialised technological development? It makes me feel physically sick that this is a thing. I had a probably similar clause in an old contract, anything I built or indeed thought, in or out of work belonged to the company.
mcv 12y ago
> Certain types of algorithms, concepts, processes, etc. are possibly protectable and could fall under question. Only if they have been explicitly protected. Copyright is the only protection that's automatically granted; patents need to be filed explicitly. If Carmack's claims are correct that none of his work has been patented, and that Oculus didn't use any code that he wrote while in the employ of Id, then he's in the clear and ZeniMax doesn't have a leg to stand on.

georgemcbay 12y ago

From a legal perspective, yes, there are more things to consider. From a common sense perspective, ZeniMax AFAIK wasn't even working on VR at this time period other than Carmack dabbling in his own "free time", so this is a pretty naked attempt for them to make the claim that anything he worked on even remotely related to games is owned by them, which I have a huge issue with (even if it is a concept that holds legal water in some states). I'd have more sympathy for ZeniMax if they were bullish on VR and Carmack was working on an official project for them in the VR space and then left for another company, but this doesn't look like that at all, this looks like a game company owned by a lawyer trying to get a big payday on an opportunity they previously missed the boat on, using tenuous legal technicalities.

stonemetal 12y ago
As far as I know He is in Texas (Id is or was in Dallas). Does anyone know which way Texas leans on those issues? Either way DOOM 3 BFG was officially announced to support VR head sets, so he probably has worked with VR in some official capacity.
- sillysaurus3 12y ago
  If Texas leans the wrong way, it must be challenged. It's ridiculous that Zenimax could possibly pull something like this with the full support of the law.
  - sdgsdgsdg 12y ago
    These are the ridiculous times we live in.

hosh 12y ago

That's my read as well: ZeniMax wants a piece of the action.

sdgsdgsdg 12y ago

I cannot understand the logic that could make this kind of contract enforceable. By this reasoning, the patent office employing Albert Einstein owned the theory of Special Relativity and presumably therefore a stake in subsequent commercialised technological development? It makes me feel physically sick that this is a thing. I had a probably similar clause in an old contract, anything I built or indeed thought, in or out of work belonged to the company.

mcv 12y ago

> Certain types of algorithms, concepts, processes, etc. are possibly protectable and could fall under question. Only if they have been explicitly protected. Copyright is the only protection that's automatically granted; patents need to be filed explicitly. If Carmack's claims are correct that none of his work has been patented, and that Oculus didn't use any code that he wrote while in the employ of Id, then he's in the clear and ZeniMax doesn't have a leg to stand on.