LATEST CHATTY HEADER
Subscribe to Shacknews Mercury starting at $1/month!
Chrome Shack Community Guidelines Chatty Search
Scroll down to join the conversation.
New to Shacknews? Signup for a Free Account
Already have an account? Login Now
Subscribe to Shacknews Mercury starting at $1/month!
Chrome Shack Community Guidelines Chatty Search
Scroll down to join the conversation.
If it's the former, then yeah, I'd say Take Two have a very legitimate complaint.
Thread Truncated. Click to see all 32 replies.
The only way DNF is ever getting published by anyone else, is if Take2 either a) sells the rights b) agrees to a joint publishing deal. Neither of the two are likely to happen since Take2 doesn't need any financial assistance in publishing DNF.
This is one big mess and as I posted earlier this week, I knew that Take2 would sue. Problem is, wtf are they even suing for?
Take2 has every right to sue for performance under the contract. But if 3DR in fact had a contract with them for the title. Fact is, they don't. If they did, it would be part of the lawsuit. I'm sure there'll be a lot more docs in discovery. But right now, as Scott Miller says, its all spin by people who don't have fracking clue.
T2 doesn't have a single leg to stand on to sue 3DR for something they bought without it being tied to 3DR. Thats like me buying your sister's busted car and she tells me that her boyfriend will fix it. The bastard doesn't fix it, so I sue him - even though him and I have no dealings whatsoever.
The only way I can see this going South and against 3DR is if Take2 assumed a publishing contract from Infogrames and which held 3DR to very specific performances under the contract. My guess is that no such thing exists because if it did, T2 would have sued by now instead of waiting for almost seven years and 3DR to go tits up.
The post has been reported. Thank you!
You must be logged in to post.
You must be logged in to post.