3 ms·

"I would." Then you're a sellout, and an enemy of labor. Enjoy your pieces of silver. Had the tech come from a line employee, maybe--but it came from somebody

"I would." Then you're a sellout, and an enemy of labor. Enjoy your pieces of silver. Had the tech come from a line employee, maybe--but it came from somebody with a long history of helping others in the community, of developing technology as a default idle process, and who basically invented the field. That you'd honor Zenimax's position here is very unfortunate, least of all because you'd be supporting the position that anything you do while employed belongs to your employer, especially after a precedent is set to the contrary. I'm not shocked that Zenimax is suing, because they're a bunch of money-grubbing assholes and probably sad they missed out on the cash from the Facebook acquisition. That said, I don't pretend for a minute that what they're doing is anything other than that: being money-grubbing assholes.

DerpDerpDerp 12y ago
According to the lawsuit filing (page 8 of the PDF linked above), Carmac was researching VR at id under ZeniMax. So yes, I think projects you undertake at work for money belong to your employer, and that this is a reasonable standard. > least of all because you'd be supporting the position that anything you do while employed belongs to your employer My position is that work you do for hire belongs to the person paying, not anything to do with side projects. > 25. In 2011, ZeniMax actively pursued that research, including experiments with various off-the-shelf headsets. However, none provided an experience sufficiently immersive and responsive to be commercially successful. A significant limitation was “latency” – the delay between a user’s movement and the corresponding change in the displayed image. > 26. By 2012, ZeniMax employees, including Carmack, had amassed valuable and confidential know-how and trade secret information about how to develop, combine, and optimize hardware, firmware, and software for an improved and competitively advantageous virtual reality experience (the “VR Technology”). > 27. ZeniMax planned to demonstrate its VR Technology at the E3 Convention in June 2012, using one of its leading brands, “DOOM 3: BFG Edition.” On or about March 7, 2012 – a month before ZeniMax obtained a prototype Rift or had any contact with Luckey – id Software’s Creative Director tested a virtual reality headset in ZeniMax’s offices using ZeniMax’s VR Technology, as shown in this photograph posted online by id Software at that time: [Photo Omitted in Quote] (Pages 9-10 of lawsuit PDF) As can be seen, ZeniMax was actively pursuing VR outside of Carmac's work with Oculus, and hence his work on the Oculus project would fall under rather reasonable IP assignments - see the inserted image of the contract clause from page 8 of the lawsuit.
- angersock 12y ago
  So, your examples show an issue that recurs elsewhere in that document: > 45. Luckey used ZeniMax’s VR Technology that he acquired through the FTP site and otherwise to create and promote the modified Rift headset. > 46. Around the same time, ZeniMax also sent cables and customized sensors to Luckey and disclosed – pursuant to the Non-Disclosure Agreement – additional hardware design improvements regarding optics calibration and sensor mounting. I keep seeing Zenimax used (presumably) in place of Carmack--probably because their arrangement was more "let the father of desktop gaming graphics do whatever he wants", and it looks really good in this filing if it isn't him but Zenimax and Zenimax employees. My issue with your excerpt of 26 is that how to "developm combine, and optimize hardware, firmware, and software...for virtual reality" is a completely broad description which can apply to any sort of 3D work whatsoever. It sounds impressive as hell, sure, but the fact is that tweaking a shader on Ogre3D would fall under that category. It's stupidly broad. By conveniently switching around when they refer to what--in other words, by being lawyers--they manage to sound really damning when pretty much anything would fall under their claimed work.
  - DerpDerpDerp 12y ago
    The point of my quotation is merely to show that as part of work activities, research on VR was being done at id (ZeniMax) prior to contact with Oculus, and that Carmack's work on the subject would thus fall under the IP assignment clause from page 8. Do you disagree with that analysis?
deleted 12y ago
[deleted]
- angersock 12y ago
  You know how I know you didn't read the complaint? Because John Carmack modified Palmer Luckey's Rift prototype and made it better. He is not the origin of "the tech." Would you like to elaborate on this, or just look like a jerk?
  - wglb 12y ago
    Let's not do personal attacks here on HN.
    - sillysaurus3 12y ago
      Just for the record, angersock was responding to a now-deleted comment which ended with, "The rest of your comment is pointless drivel and I'll pretend for your sake that I didn't read it." I'm posting this so that angersock doesn't come off looking worse than the party they were replying to, since some context was lost due to the deletion. I wish there were a button to signal to people "Hey, you're getting personal, there's no need for that" without actually leaving a comment. I think it would help, because it seems like many of these personal attacks are simply due to people being forgetful that it's not worth it to get into squabbles.
      - angersock 12y ago
        Thank you sir or madam. I really just wanted elaboration on where they were going with the fact that Carmack made some modifications to the prototype.
rafekett 12y ago
> anything you do while employed belongs to your employer have you ever signed a software engineering contract? surrender of IP created at work or working for the company is _very_ standard.

DerpDerpDerp 12y ago

According to the lawsuit filing (page 8 of the PDF linked above), Carmac was researching VR at id under ZeniMax. So yes, I think projects you undertake at work for money belong to your employer, and that this is a reasonable standard. > least of all because you'd be supporting the position that anything you do while employed belongs to your employer My position is that work you do for hire belongs to the person paying, not anything to do with side projects. > 25. In 2011, ZeniMax actively pursued that research, including experiments with various off-the-shelf headsets. However, none provided an experience sufficiently immersive and responsive to be commercially successful. A significant limitation was “latency” – the delay between a user’s movement and the corresponding change in the displayed image. > 26. By 2012, ZeniMax employees, including Carmack, had amassed valuable and confidential know-how and trade secret information about how to develop, combine, and optimize hardware, firmware, and software for an improved and competitively advantageous virtual reality experience (the “VR Technology”). > 27. ZeniMax planned to demonstrate its VR Technology at the E3 Convention in June 2012, using one of its leading brands, “DOOM 3: BFG Edition.” On or about March 7, 2012 – a month before ZeniMax obtained a prototype Rift or had any contact with Luckey – id Software’s Creative Director tested a virtual reality headset in ZeniMax’s offices using ZeniMax’s VR Technology, as shown in this photograph posted online by id Software at that time: [Photo Omitted in Quote] (Pages 9-10 of lawsuit PDF) As can be seen, ZeniMax was actively pursuing VR outside of Carmac's work with Oculus, and hence his work on the Oculus project would fall under rather reasonable IP assignments - see the inserted image of the contract clause from page 8 of the lawsuit.

angersock 12y ago
So, your examples show an issue that recurs elsewhere in that document: > 45. Luckey used ZeniMax’s VR Technology that he acquired through the FTP site and otherwise to create and promote the modified Rift headset. > 46. Around the same time, ZeniMax also sent cables and customized sensors to Luckey and disclosed – pursuant to the Non-Disclosure Agreement – additional hardware design improvements regarding optics calibration and sensor mounting. I keep seeing Zenimax used (presumably) in place of Carmack--probably because their arrangement was more "let the father of desktop gaming graphics do whatever he wants", and it looks really good in this filing if it isn't him but Zenimax and Zenimax employees. My issue with your excerpt of 26 is that how to "developm combine, and optimize hardware, firmware, and software...for virtual reality" is a completely broad description which can apply to any sort of 3D work whatsoever. It sounds impressive as hell, sure, but the fact is that tweaking a shader on Ogre3D would fall under that category. It's stupidly broad. By conveniently switching around when they refer to what--in other words, by being lawyers--they manage to sound really damning when pretty much anything would fall under their claimed work.
- DerpDerpDerp 12y ago
  The point of my quotation is merely to show that as part of work activities, research on VR was being done at id (ZeniMax) prior to contact with Oculus, and that Carmack's work on the subject would thus fall under the IP assignment clause from page 8. Do you disagree with that analysis?

deleted 12y ago

[deleted]

angersock 12y ago
You know how I know you didn't read the complaint? Because John Carmack modified Palmer Luckey's Rift prototype and made it better. He is not the origin of "the tech." Would you like to elaborate on this, or just look like a jerk?
- wglb 12y ago
  Let's not do personal attacks here on HN.
  - sillysaurus3 12y ago
    Just for the record, angersock was responding to a now-deleted comment which ended with, "The rest of your comment is pointless drivel and I'll pretend for your sake that I didn't read it." I'm posting this so that angersock doesn't come off looking worse than the party they were replying to, since some context was lost due to the deletion. I wish there were a button to signal to people "Hey, you're getting personal, there's no need for that" without actually leaving a comment. I think it would help, because it seems like many of these personal attacks are simply due to people being forgetful that it's not worth it to get into squabbles.
    - angersock 12y ago
      Thank you sir or madam. I really just wanted elaboration on where they were going with the fact that Carmack made some modifications to the prototype.

rafekett 12y ago

> anything you do while employed belongs to your employer have you ever signed a software engineering contract? surrender of IP created at work or working for the company is _very_ standard.