Tag: Lawsuit

Human Head Studios Sued For Abandoning Rune II


Human Head Studios will always hold a special place in many hearts as the company that made Prey 2006. About three weeks ago, the company launched Rune II on the Epic Game Store. Set in Norse mythology during the end times, Rune II puts you in the shoes of a warrior chosen by the gods to end Ragnarok and save Midgard from the treachery of that trickster Loki.

Rune II is also the focus of a lawsuit alleging fraud, contract breach, and fraudulent concealment, among other charges. The lawsuit stems from the events that occurred after Rune II launched on the Epic Game Store. Right after, as literally a day later they announced that Human Head Studios would immediately shut down with its developers transferred to a new studio under Bethesda’s management. Rune II’s publisher and financier Ragnarok Game LLC is understandably not happy with this turn of events, especially since Human Head is allegedly refusing to turn over source code and assets that Ragnarok now legally owns, in order to allow continued support of the game.

A notice was posted to the Rune II forums discussing the details of the lawsuit.

“Since Human Head’s sudden closure, announcement, and discovering the active concealment of their acquisition, we have repeatedly requested access to the final launch build source code and RUNE II game assets. This is so we can continue to support, update, and execute future DLC for our community. As part of the publishing agreement on RUNE II, Ragnarok Game LLC has paid for the development of these assets and is the rightful owner of them. After repeated refusals by Human Head to produce these assets, we’ve had no choice but to file a legal complaint in order to obtain the RUNE II game assets. We have exhausted all possible options before getting to this point.  This is not the step we wanted to take, but it is necessary in order to fulfill our promises to our community.”

The lawsuit itself which can be read online accuses Ben Gokey, Christopher Rhinehart, and Paul MacArthur, all Human Head Principals, of intentionally damaging the Rune II brand and image by failing to perform and then conspiring to abandon the property, with the studio intentionally closing when it did to maximize that damage.

“In summary: (a) Human Head entered into a long-term agreement with Ragnarok — the whole goal of which was to launch Rune II and to provide the necessary support for its commercial success, (b) Human Head accepted millions of dollars in payment, but failed to perform, (c) instead of curing its deficient work, Human Head secretly conspired to abandon Ragnarok and the Rune II community in an apparent attempt to defraud and harm Ragnarok and the game, and (d) Human Head timed the unveiling of its plan to cause maximum damage. By this time, Ragnarok had learned its lesson. Ragnarok refused to be blackmailed and pay the ransom, repeatedly requesting the return of its property. What did Ben Gokey, Christopher Rhinehart, and Paul MacArthur do? They made unauthorized alterations to the code and attempted (unsuccessfully) to make public the unauthorized changes. Of course, since Human Head no longer existed, Gokey, Rhinehart, and MacArthur were not altering the code on behalf of Human Head. Regardless, alter the code they did. “

The lawsuit goes on to accuse Human Head of holding code hostage as ransom for monetary payments, as well as accusing the studio of attempting to upload altered versions of the game to the Epic Game Store despite demands to cease. If even half of the lawsuit is true, it’s a pretty damning story against Human Head heads Gokey, Rinehart, and MacArthur.

Source: Eurogamer

IPE Update: Epic Games v. ABC Moving Forward


Epic Games is moving forward with its lawsuit against Acceleration Bay (ABC) following an order denying the defendant’s motion to dismiss.

Taking the initiative upon itself, Epic Games filed suit several months ago against Acceleration Bay, seeking a declaratory judgment that their game Fortnite did not infringe on patents owned by the defendant. The lawsuit was predicated on contacts between the two parties where ABC appeared to be offering a “mutual resolution” to avoid potential litigation, as it believed that Epic Games had infringed on a patent owned related to network technology. Epic got snarky with its response, noting that ABC appears to exist solely to litigate patents it buys in bulk from third parties.

Last month Acceleration Bay filed a motion to dismiss on grounds of lack of subject matter jurisdiction (wrong court) and lack of controversy (there must be reasonable anticipation of a lawsuit in order to file for a declaratory judgment). Following oral arguments on October 22, the court denied the motion. Acceleration Bay must file an answer to the lawsuit no later than November 5.

As always, MMO Fallout has uploaded the relevant dockets to our Google Drive. You can view the decision at this link. The file included a motion to seal certain exhibits so you may see some of our documents get replaced/removed/redacted in the future depending on circumstances.

Not Massive: Fortnite Corroborates Child’s Knowledge of Guns


Who said video games would never offer real world experience?

Today’s human interest piece comes to us from a child custody case in the Eastern District of New York. The petitioner is the father of a child who had petitioned the court for the return of his son to Ecuador. The child, a nine year old, had been retained in the United States by the mother and without the consent of the father since mid-2018. The father (petitioner) owns a gun shop and warehouse in Ecuador and is a dealer of firearms and accessories (Editor’s note: It should be noted that the firearm business is legal/legitimate). During the custody hearing, the child testified to the father having guns in the house, on display, within the reach of a child. How did the child know the identity of the guns? Fortnite.

According to the testimony, the child was able to verify what he had seen in the house including a silencer and a shotgun because he had seen something similar in Fortnite.

The story does not have a great ending, as the court eventually ruled that the child would be returned to Ecuador under Hague Convention. Still, the court did not seem to have any reason to doubt the child’s game-based knowledge.

The full entry can be found at the link below. Content Warning: The document below has been included for those who wish to view it. It contains numerous detailed allegations of the repeated physical and verbal abuse of a child by a parental figure.

Source: Eastern District of New York

IPE Update: Acceleration Bay Files MTD Against Epic Games


Nearly two months ago Epic Games filed a lawsuit against Acceleration Bay LLC seeking declaratory judgment from the court in regard to allegations that Epic was using technology owned by AB in one of its many patents. Acceleration Bay filed a motion to dismiss on lack of subject matter jurisdiction (wrong court) as well as lack of controversy. In order to receive a declaratory judgment, a plaintiff must show the court that there is very likely to be a lawsuit over the matter.

“The Court should dismiss this action because there is no immediate case or controversy between Epic Games and Acceleration Bay. Epic Games seeks declaratory judgment of non-infringement of seven patents owned by Acceleration Bay. But in the pre-suit communications that Epic Games alleges gave rise to this action, Acceleration Bay did not provide Epic Games with any claim charts or infringement analysis and Acceleration Bay did not threaten Epic Games with litigation. Instead, the parties were engaged in preliminary licensing discussions, when Epic Games abruptly filed this action. The Complaint fails to allege facts sufficient to confer declaratory subject matter jurisdiction over this action, dictating dismissal under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(1).”

For its part, Acceleration Bay has denied ever threatening Epic with a lawsuit (despite evidence from Epic showing just that) but instead offering a “mutually acceptable path forward” which may end up on the list of veiled threats alongside “nice business you got here, it’d be a shame of something were to happen to it.”

“Acceleration Bay never threatened Epic Games with litigation. For example, on April 30, 2019 and May 8, 2019, Acceleration Bay’s representative (Mr. Garland) stated in an email that Acceleration Bay is “interested in arranging an introductory meeting [to] provide an overview of Acceleration Bay and to agree to a mutually acceptable path forward” and that Acceleration Bay “remain[s] interested in trying to reach a business solution with Epic Games.” Declaration of Paul Andre filed herewith (“Andre Decl.”), Ex. 1 at 1.”

See? No threats, just wanting to reach an amicable solution (and sue if you don’t meet our demands). If you wanted to see the “generic, substance-free form letter” that Epic received, I have included it below.

As always, MMO Fallout has provided the court dockets in our Google Drive at the attached link. Download it, share it, do whatever you want with it. It is 74 pages in whole so get yourself a nice cup of coffee before you dive in.

More on this story as it develops.

In Plain English: Youtube Hauls Copyright Troll Into Court


Youtube is finally taking the fight to copyright trolls and this week filed a lawsuit against an individual for allegedly abusing the DMCA takedown system in order to extort and harass Youtube creators into paying him money.

The defendant is Christopher Brady, an individual residing in Omaha, Nebraska. According to a complaint filed in the District of Nebraska, Youtube alleges that Brady has sent dozens of DMCA takedown notices making false claims of copyright infringement. The DMCA takedowns were part of a campaign to harass and extort money from the creators, with Brady threatening to send additional fraudulent notices in order to cause the termination of his victim’s Youtube accounts unless they paid him off. Brady is also accused of misusing the personal information that his victims supplied to him during the counter notification process.

Youtube’s attorneys went as far as bringing attention to the DMCA’s built-in risk of abuse:

“Further abuse can arise because of the DMCA’s counter notification process. Under the DMCA, users who believe that their content was removed because of an improper takedown notice may ask YouTube to restore the content pending resolution of the question of infringement. To trigger the counter notification process, a user must supply their name, address and phone number to YouTube, provide details of the allegedly wrongful takedown notice, and consent to be sued by the original complainant. In accordance with the DMCA, YouTube forwards a copy of complete and valid counter notifications to the original complainant. Instead of using the personal information in a counter notification for purposes of resolving an infringement dispute, abusive complainants may use it for purposes of harassment.”

Brady is accused of targeting multiple Youtube accounts although the lawsuit notes two in particular that Brady allegedly proceeded to send ransom letters to, promising that he would rescind the strikes if money was sent via Paypal or bitcoin in the sum of over $100. Both Youtubers publicized their experiences which brought the extortion attempt to Youtube’s attention.

But the story gets worse. It always gets worse.

Further on, Youtube alleges that Brady attempted to extort a Youtuber going by the handle Cxlvxn. When Cxlvxn submitted a counter notification, his house was swatted.

“Cxlvxn submitted a counter notification on July 4th, 2019. On July 10th, he announced via Twitter that he had been the victim of a swatting scheme that day. “Swatting” is the act of making a bogus call to emergency services in an attempt to bring about the dispatch of a large number of armed police officers to a particular address. Given the timing of (i) Defendant Brady’s online dispute with Cxlvxn, (ii) Brady’s false copyright claims against Cxlvxn; (iii) Brady’s receipt of Cxlvxn’s true home address via Cxlvxn’s counter-notification; and (iv) the reported swatting incident, it appears Brady used the personal information gained through his abuse of the DMCA process to engage in swatting.”

All in all, Youtube alleges that Brady submitted more than two dozen false DMCA claims, which were signed under penalty of perjury, using at least fifteen fake identities all of which were traced back to him. The false claims have caused Youtube a substantial sum in investigating to detect and halt his behavior, and the very real possibility that Brady will continue his abusive conduct into the future.

Youtube is requesting compensatory damages for violation of 17 U.S.C. § 512(f), attorneys’ fees, injunctive relief barring Brady and his associates from filing false DMCA strikes, and anything else the court may deem appropriate. When parties file at DMCA takedown, they affirm that they do so under penalty of perjury for false claims and may be held liable for damages incurred by their false claim.

As always, the docket related to the case has been uploaded to the MMO Fallout Google Drive. All allegations laid forth in the lawsuit above are mere allegations and the defendant is presumed innocent until proven guilty. More information to come as the case progresses.

IPE Update: Trion Worlds Lawsuit Coming To A Close As Parties Agree On Settlement


(Update 8/10/19: Included some background information on the case for those who might not be as familiar)

It’s finally over, folks. After nearly four years in court, the Trion Worlds lawsuit may finally be reaching its final days.

Earlier this month in the superior court of San Mateo, California, dockets have been submitted to the court offering notice that the parties involved in the lawsuit have agreed in principle to settle the case. According to court filings, the terms of the settlement have not yet been documented, but will be coming in the near future.

It is also worth noting that payment for the settlement will come from Navigators Insurance Company, the insurer for Trion Worlds, and Trion Worlds will be dismissed from liability for the claims.

Plaintiffs and Navigators Insurance Company, the insurer for the officers and directors of Defendant Trion Worlds, Inc., have reached an agreement in principle to settle this case on class wide basis. The proposed settlement will provide for notice to the class members of the proposed settlement, payments to members of the proposed settlement class who file claims, and will release Defendant Trion Worlds, Inc. from liability for the claims asserted in this action. The parties are working to document all of the terms of the settlement.

At some point there will be notification for members of the class who will be eligible for compensation.

Four years ago, Aaron Van Fleet and Paul Ovberg along with other plaintiffs filed suit against Trion Worlds regarding their publishing of the game ArcheAge. The lawsuit alleged false advertising regarding pre-release advertising offering a 10% discount on cash shop purchases for subscribers. That 10% discount was later retroactively scrubbed from press releases and ultimately was scrapped entirely, with Trion Worlds replacing the deal with a 10% bonus on all gem purchases that did not extend to a number of customers that would otherwise be covered by the discount on shop purchases. The lawsuit also claimed that Trion’s loot box system violated California penal code against illegal lottery.

Since then, Trion Worlds has virtually gone bust with the company transferring its assets to another Trion Worlds and then selling off those assets to Gamigo. Their defense of this lawsuit has been primarily funded from liability insurance.

As always, dockets cited will be available in the MMO Fallout Google Drive. This file is labeled “settlement.pdf”. MMO Fallout will keep a closer eye on the lawsuit and update as new information becomes available.

IPE Update: A List Of Companies Subpoena’d By Twitch


It’s time to talk about Twitch again, and that means the Twitch v. John Doe lawsuit.

When last we left our heroes, Twitch had filed suit in the Northern District of California against one hundred John Doe defendants for federal trademark infringement, breach of contract, trespass to chattels, and fraud. The lawsuit targeted the antics of users who gained some notoriety earlier in the year for filling the Artifact category of Twitch will all sorts of vile material, including hardcore pornography and videos of real life killings.

This week Judge Orrick granted Twitch’s application for leave in order to file subpoenas against third parties, with the ultimate goal being to uncover the identities of the defendants in the lawsuit. Those third parties include:

  • Twitter
  • Google
  • Microsoft/Hotmail
  • Discord
  • Verizon
  • Comcast Cable Communications LLC
  • Contina, Charter Communications Inc.
  • Optimum Online
  • Suddenlink Communications
  • OVH Hosting

Third party subpoena recipients will have 30 days with which to serve the defendants with a copy of the subpoena and a copy of the order, and then the defendants will have 30 days to file any orders contesting or squashing the subpoena, after which the third party recipients will have 10 days to produce information responsive to Twitch.

In fancy terms, those who suspect or have a good idea that they may become a defendant in this lawsuit will have ample notice that they are in fact a defendant.

As always, MMO Fallout has provided the related docket at our expense in the Google Drive.

IPE Update: Amro Elansari Files Appeal In RuneScape Lawsuit


Posted with no comment. PDF version available here.

In Plain English: Epic and the Generic, Substance-Free Patent Troll


Epic Games is once again back in court, except this time they are taking on a more defensive tone.

As of July 18, Epic Games has filed a lawsuit against Acceleration Bay LLC regarding some bad blood between the two companies that has boiled over in the past few years. According to court dockets filed in the Northern District of California, Epic Games is asking for a declaratory judgment of non-infringement regarding seven patents owned by the defendant.

According to Epic’s filing, defendant Acceleration Bay LLC in early 2015 acquired a number of patents from The Boeing Company. These patents cover a computer network and/or broadcast channel with an m-regular, incomplete topology. I’ll let the docket try to explain some of it, but it has to do with how computers interact on a network.

  • The claims of these patents all require that (1) each participant/computer in the network must have connections to at least three other neighboring participants.
  • The claims of these patents all require that (2) the network must be “m-regular” where each participant is connected to the exact same number, m, of neighbor participants.
  • The claims of these patents all require that (3) the network must be incomplete – m must be at least two less than the total number of participants.
  • 31. In other words, each participant must be connected to at least three neighbor participants, and no participant can be connected to all of the other participants in the network.

Fast forward to 2018 and Acceleration Bay’s lawyers sent a letter to Epic with allegedly no explanation or information, and claimed that Epic was infringing on their patents and would require a license. The letter was apparently so poorly vetted by AB’s legal team that they didn’t notice that the threat still contained the name of an unrelated company that AB had presumably also threatened over its patents.

As they say, bad form.

Additionally, Epic asserted that Acceleration Bay couldn’t get through its letter without completely lying about its own existence, claiming that it was founded in 2012 (it was founded in August 2014), and calling itself a “technology incubator” (it isn’t) that “partners with inventors, corporations and entrepreneurs to accelerate growth in creating innovative companies.” AB doesn’t accelerate growth in anything. Acceleration Bay, according to Epic’s attorneys, does not provide any product or service whatsoever, and exists only to monetize patents acquired from third parties. According to Epic’s attorney’s, AB is exclusively in the market of monetizing patents.

On July 10, representatives of both companies sat down to a teleconference and evidently nothing was accomplished. AB’s attorneys don’t appear to understand what their own patent covers, or how Epic operates their games, as Epic states in the court dockets that many online multiplayer games, especially those being asserted in this lawsuit, do not function the way that the patent would cover, as player networks are communicating with Epic’s servers and not each other.

Epic has assembled its Avengers team of lawyers from the offices of Winston & Strawn to convince the court for a preemptive declaration that Epic is not infringing on any patents alleged in this case. Acceleration had not filed a lawsuit against Epic, however the threatening letters are enough for Epic to go to the court and demand an answer to force the letters to stop. Acceleration Bay has 21 days to respond to the lawsuit.

As always, MMO Fallout has acquired at our own cost the dockets for this case and they can be found on our Google Drive. The docket itself is linked here, as Acceleration.pdf, or it will be in a folder titled “Acceleration” once more dockets are uploaded.

I paid way too much for this article. If you really like patents, I recommend checking out the docket because it’s about 25 pages of the actual lawsuit and then 350+ of the patents at dispute presented at evidence. Our condolences go out to the court clerk who had to print this out and file it.

In Plain English: Court Throws Out Jagex Ban Lawsuit After Five Days


Today’s In Plain English is going to be a short one, but you’ll understand why when you see that the gist of it is about six sentences long. It comes to us from the Eastern District of Pennsylvania and involves everyone’s favorite developer of RuneScape: Jagex. Along with their parent company Shanghai Fukong, Jagex last week was sued in Pennsylvania court by one Amro Elansari, who is alleging that Jagex muted him without reason. The lawsuit goes on to claim that the UK developer refused to provide an explanation and denied Elansari’s request for an appeal. Elansari’s suit alleges violations of due process, free speech, and human rights.

Elansari was granted leave to proceed in forma pauperis, fancy legal speak for nulling filing fees, however the court took some umbrage with his claims. Judge Kearney noted that Elansari’s claims of constitutional violations were implausible, adding that the first amendment and its constitutional free speech guarantees do not restrict private entities. More so, the fifth amendment due process clause also does not apply to private companies.

As such, Elansari’s lawsuit has been dismissed just five days after being filed. Elansari cannot make any further constitutional or federal claims however if he decides to bring the lawsuit back on state charges in state court, he absolutely may do so.

As always, MMO Fallout is hosting the relevant dockets at our expense at the Google Drive. As the lawsuit was filed pro se, MMO Fallout has removed some personal contact details from the documents for the sake of the plaintiff.

%d bloggers like this: