waiting for resolution RAZBAM Situation Post Archive (will be deleted)

[=DROOPY=]

4 hours ago, Koziolek said:

Which is quite expected. l would become impatient after 2 years. It's in the hands of lawyers now, so don't expect resolution any time sooner.

Exactly...  Even in situations that clearly, beyond doubt , were caused by the defendant's actions of his own volition, it still takes over 2yrs of litigation to even *begin* to discuss settling or making a judgement on the case.

I literally just went through this.

[Horns]

8 hours ago, schmiefel said:

Well but in case of DCS the access to the 'gym' (the DCS base system) is free for everyone but the yoga academy stuff has its own training devices (the modules they created) put in there and now their access to their own stuff is revoked from the gym owner.

The academy staff aren’t giving classes anyway, so access to their training devices is immaterial, ie Razbam staff being unable to access their products has nothing to do with anything while they refuse to work on them. While they aren’t doing updates there’s nothing for them to playtest.

[C3PO]

Just wish this could get sorted. Obvious post I know.

[draconus]

Is there a plan to add the fuze options to all pylons on F-15E?

Another side effect of the updates hold, then users refunding is the lack of new campaigns for the module which further decreases the module's value.

[Mainstay]

1 hour ago, DaWu said:

It does not seem that you guys understand that this and new Sinai pr disaster is harmin you more than any legal matter with RB. 
a long time consuming win over RB will cost you more than a quick compromise filled quick Solution 

Disagree, its a multimillion business and not some random street cart selling candy to the local kids.

Contracts are contracts and they excist for a reason.

I dont care if that means i cant fly any RAZBAM module for a while as long as they settle what went wrong behind the curtain.

 

[Nightdare]

1 hour ago, DaWu said:

It does not seem that you guys understand that this and new Sinai pr disaster is harmin you more than any legal matter with RB. 
a long time consuming win over RB will cost you more than a quick compromise filled quick Solution 

 

Surrendering your IP is company suicide, so where do you get the idea this will be a benefit for DCS in the long run

 

Must be the entitlement for instant gratification of the current generation to believe that the easy solutions are always the best

[Zahnatom]

Anyone got a summary of what we know right now?

[Horns]

27 minutes ago, Zahnatom said:

Anyone got a summary of what we know right now?

Just what's in the first post

Edit: There's a lot of smack talk based on second-hand information going around in various places on the net, but the first post has everything official. Beyond that, the only thing I can think of is that I think (hope I'm not butchering the meaning) ED have said they will keep the Razbam modules working as they are now, ie they will ensure nothing that works now will break due to updates.

Edited August 11, 2024 by Horns

[LancerVI]

Not only smack talk, but corpo defense forces are on high alert, like the company is going to pay their mortgages or something. Silly and foolish.

Just look at the post counts. They live for this for whatever reason. 

 

[Horns]

31 minutes ago, LancerVI said:

Not only smack talk, but corpo defense forces are on high alert, like the company is going to pay their mortgages or something. Silly and foolish.

Just look at the post counts. They live for this for whatever reason. 

 

Thanks for the reminder: Not just smack talk, unsubstantiated smack talk. No doubt each side has their defenders and detractors, but if it’s not backed up by official word from at least one party, it’s fit to be flushed.

[BIGNEWY]

I have hidden some posts, if you want to talk about finances for other companies or other third party issues please do it in another thread. 

Off topic posts will be removed. 

thank you 

[aaronwhite]

On 8/10/2024 at 4:52 PM, =DROOPY= said:

Exactly...  Even in situations that clearly, beyond doubt , were caused by the defendant's actions of his own volition, it still takes over 2yrs of litigation to even *begin* to discuss settling or making a judgement on the case.

I literally just went through this.

Yeah, we have stuff we've been waiting on for years where I work dealing with legal stuff that we have to hold onto mailboxes and files on systems for, just in the event that it's suddenly needed in the case. 

[Nightdare]

On 8/8/2024 at 6:29 PM, DUSTY said:

What's EDs endgame here?

 

Keeping DCS alive by not allowing misuse of their property

...how hard is that to grasp?

 

And I personally don't care what RB throws into the public, apparently ED has a better lawyer than RB, because ED's lawyer actually managed to keep ED's mouth shut and not complicate matters further

Not that it matters to us if the Management, or legal teams talk to each other, both are representing the company in either case

 

What I care about is that this issue is resolved in the consumers favor (we're all looking out for #1 here), and I don't give $.01 how, but I can certainly understand ED not wanting this to end with their IP up for grabs by anyone

A Free For All DCS property won't benefit us in any way, this doesn't work like Linux

 

[SkateZilla]

10 hours ago, Nightdare said:

 

Keeping DCS alive by not allowing misuse of their property

...how hard is that to grasp?

 

And I personally don't care what RB throws into the public, apparently ED has a better lawyer than RB, because ED's lawyer actually managed to keep ED's mouth shut and not complicate matters further

Not that it matters to us if the Management, or legal teams talk to each other, both are representing the company in either case

 

What I care about is that this issue is resolved in the consumers favor (we're all looking out for #1 here), and I don't give $.01 how, but I can certainly understand ED not wanting this to end with their IP up for grabs by anyone

A Free For All DCS property won't benefit us in any way, this doesn't work like Linux

 

Less about lawyers and more about the team's professional tact,
ED's mouth never opened, they remained silent during the dispute, it wasn't until after RB went public that ED even posted a single reply.

That being said. it's not to say that some level of frustration for the RB team members stuck in the middle of this mess isn't *justified/warranted* if not a bit zealous at times.

Any committed and obviously talented 3rd party team members lost over this situation is a loss for DCS on the whole,  without innovative 3rd parties, the sim doesn't evolve.

ie: HB alone has added so many new things to DCS.


As for the outcome, Damage control maybe the priority, as contributing team members have ben lost, as well as dev cycle time.
Agreed, ED has to make it clear that DCS is a consumer product and their IP is not free.

There's already an issue, there's mentions of smaller Airforce's using DCS modules to train, etc., if you watch interviews, specific individuals stress DCS is not to be used in that manner,

The U.S. Airforce doesn't have dozens of PCs running DCS:A-10C, they have the Professional version running on the professional platform, 
And We technically got a stripped down plate of left overs in DCS A-10C 1.1.x.x, it may look similar, because the core assets are the same, but the pro platform is an entirely different beast.

Edited August 14, 2024 by SkateZilla

[JuiceIsLoose]

So then you think the better solution would have been for RB to be silent and just stop? We would be at no updates for like 6-7 months with zero communication as to why? That’s what would have happened if RB said nothing. How does that make this situation better? Better for ED sure, because no bad publicity. 

And do you think RB would blow the whistle on the whole thing if it wasn’t their last resort? It wasn’t like there check was a week late in the mail. They didn’t get the sales for the jet that had been selling for months at that time. They had to know this would be a huge blow up, but if ED wasn’t working with them what are they supposed to do?

I imagine the only other option was to just silent sue ED. But if that happened, that’s the more nuclear option. It seemed they wanted a resolution without involving courts (which is also what ED said they wanted in their first statement). 

[Guest]

1 hour ago, JuiceIsLoose said:

I imagine the only other option was to just silent sue ED. But if that happened, that’s the more nuclear option. It seemed they wanted a resolution without involving courts (which is also what ED said they wanted in their first statement). 

There are many many other solutions than going public suddenly.  Getting your lawyer to send demand letters for one thing.  Actually suing is a very very last resort.  
 

And if you do have to put out a statement, either (1) work together with ED on the wording of that statement or (2) include as little information as possible - something like “Due to certain circumstances that we cannot discuss at this time, no updates will be included for our products in the upcoming patch. We are working hard to resolve the situation as soon as possible and return to our normal update schedule.  We appreciate that you may have questions but unfortunately we cannot provide any additional information at this time.  Thank you for your understanding.”  

If neither of those are good enough, put out a more detailed statement but give ED lots of warning — tell them something like “we need to put out a statement.  If we have not otherwise resolved the issues by 5:00pm Eastern time on _____, 2024 , we will be releasing the attached press release.”

Of course, another possibility would be for RB to just do whatever ED is asking them to do re IP (assuming EDs story is true). While that may seem silly, it’s not really any sillier than people saying “ED should just pay RB” under the assumption that RB’s story is true. 

Long story short, there are a vanishingly small number of situations where blindsiding the other side with a public announcement is the smart move in a business to business dispute. 

Edited August 14, 2024 by wombat778

[JuiceIsLoose]

55 minutes ago, wombat778 said:

There are many many other solutions than going public suddenly.  Getting your lawyer to send demand letters for one thing.  Actually suing is a very very last resort.  
 

And if you do have to put out a statement, either (1) work together with ED on the wording of that statement or (2) include as little information as possible - something like “Due to certain circumstances that we cannot discuss at this time, no updates will be included for our products in the upcoming patch. We are working hard to resolve the situation as soon as possible and return to our normal update schedule.  We appreciate that you may have questions but unfortunately we cannot provide any additional information at this time.  Thank you for your understanding.”  

If neither of those are good enough, put out a more detailed statement but give ED lots of warning — tell them something like “we need to put out a statement.  If we have not otherwise resolved the issues by 5:00pm Eastern time on _____, 2024 , we will be releasing the attached press release.”

Of course, another possibility would be for RB to just do whatever ED is asking them to do re IP (assuming EDs story is true). While that may seem silly, it’s not really any sillier than people saying “ED should just pay RB” under the assumption that RB’s story is true. 

Long story short, there are a vanishingly small number of situations where blindsiding the other side with a public announcement is the smart move in a business to business dispute. 

 

Do we know for a fact that ED had no idea that RB was going to go public? Sure, RB may have not made a joint statement with ED. But we don't know for sure that ED was unaware there was going to be a public statement at all. Again, going to say reference other materials that are not official statements (queue everyones eye rolls), but it has been brought up that ED reached out to other Third Parties to not make an additional statement with RB. So that would mean ED knew something was coming. So IF that is true (note the IF) then its not like ED was caught completely off guard. Just saying, we don't know for a fact that ED was completely blindsided by a possible public statement.

[NineLine]

30 minutes ago, JuiceIsLoose said:

Do we know for a fact that ED had no idea that RB was going to go public? Sure, RB may have not made a joint statement with ED. But we don't know for sure that ED was unaware there was going to be a public statement at all. Again, going to say reference other materials that are not official statements (queue everyones eye rolls), but it has been brought up that ED reached out to other Third Parties to not make an additional statement with RB. So that would mean ED knew something was coming. So IF that is true (note the IF) then its not like ED was caught completely off guard. Just saying, we don't know for a fact that ED was completely blindsided by a possible public statement.

This is the issue with these discussions, here or anywhere. Nobody knows all the facts here. even some of those that claim they do, don't. So going in circles trying to figure out what happened, what is happening, etc is just tail chasing at this point. It's best to just continue to wait, the process is progressing at typical speeds for such issues. 

[Guest]

2 hours ago, JuiceIsLoose said:

Do we know for a fact that ED had no idea that RB was going to go public?

Well, we know that ED stated officially “We very much regret that Ron Zambrano has decided, without even pre-advising us, to make these disparaging public statements and, more importantly, to take the customers of the Razbam developed aircraft as leverage in the discussions with us. “

That seems a pretty strong indication that ED at least feels they were pretty blindsided.  If RB had given them a copy of the press release they intended to make along with an announced release time, it seems highly unlikely that ED would have said what they said.  
 

Besides, I’m fairly certain that if ED had known what the press release would say and when it would be released in advance, they would have had a response queued up to send immediately not 3 hours later.  
 

Finally, 10:17am seems like a pretty random time to choose for a pre-scheduled public announcement.  It kinda screams “fit of pique” more than “strategic delivery”

Edited August 14, 2024 by wombat778

[Nightdare]

8 hours ago, SkateZilla said:

Less about lawyers and more about the team's professional tact,

 

That was tried and ended with RB going public

 

8 hours ago, SkateZilla said:

ED's mouth never opened, they remained silent during the dispute

 

...as they should

How to do business 101

 

8 hours ago, SkateZilla said:

it wasn't until after RB went public that ED even posted a single reply.

 

...as was necessary

Which makes us loop back to your first sentence

 

8 hours ago, SkateZilla said:

That being said. it's not to say that some level of frustration for the RB team members stuck in the middle of this mess isn't *justified/warranted* if not a bit zealous at times.

Any committed and obviously talented 3rd party team members lost over this situation is a loss for DCS on the whole,  without innovative 3rd parties, the sim doesn't evolve.

ie: HB alone has added so many new things to DCS.

 

And without IP protection, not just the RB stuff, but everything will be gone and nothing new will be added because it's dead

 

8 hours ago, SkateZilla said:

As for the outcome, Damage control maybe the priority, as contributing team members have ben lost, as well as dev cycle time.
Agreed, ED has to make it clear that DCS is a consumer product and their IP is not free.

 

Which they are certainly trying to get straight with this dispute

 

8 hours ago, SkateZilla said:

There's already an issue, there's mentions of smaller Airforce's using DCS modules to train, etc., if you watch interviews, specific individuals stress DCS is not to be used in that manner,

 

Well,... that's depending on the EULA and IP

It could indeed be that businesses and government departments need a specific license

 

Technically I can do with DCS whatever I want, rewrite files, add code, whatever

I am simply not allowed to use it in a business sense or sell it (probably not even share it)

Yes I'm very much in violation of the EULA, so I can't use this "version" in actual DCS, but whatever Frankenstein monster I concoct on my own PC and screw around with on my own time is something ED can't really do much about

 

 

8 hours ago, SkateZilla said:

The U.S. Airforce doesn't have dozens of PCs running DCS:A-10C, they have the Professional version running on the professional platform, 
And We technically got a stripped down plate of left overs in DCS A-10C 1.1.x.x, it may look similar, because the core assets are the same, but the pro platform is an entirely different beast.

 

Indeed, and depending how it's licensed, there's a good chance the Airforce isn't allowed to share parts of that version with the Navy or the National Guard either, nor would they be allowed to change the program 'at a whim' to improve upon

Probably have to either ask ED or share this code with ED -if it's not a matter of national security

All this to make sure ED keeps it's property and US court doesn't end up telling ED in the future: "Sorry, this program is so much a derivative of your original code, it no longer falls under your IP, but is now the property of the Dept. of National Defense" and allowing other companies to manage that program, who can in turn make a consumer version of it

-But I'm totally out on a limb here what ED does with/handles it's military licenses, this might even be a totally different company with ED under a larger banner and not actually part of this subject

[Mizzy]

People who don't read official announcements properly fill in the gaps with nonsense. Not mentioning any names, it's obvious.

Mizzy

Edited August 14, 2024 by Mizzy

[nessuno0505]

In my opinion it all depends on what Razbam is doing: if they have access to the development tools and are continuing to develop their modules, even if they do not publish updates due to the ongoing dispute, then when the dispute is resolved a big update will come out all at once and we will be back on track. If, on the other hand, Razbam has suspended the work altogether, when the dispute is over, even if favorable for them, the razbam modules will be dead and buried and it is very unlikely that they will be able to recover.

Since some users claim to be close to Razbam, can they share information about which of these two scenarios? Are they still working or not?

[primus_TR]

On 8/14/2024 at 9:25 PM, wombat778 said:

 It kinda screams “fit of pique” more than “strategic delivery”

There is nothing strategic about anything RB did or have been doing. They strike me as the do-then-think (and regret) kind of folks. 

[Nightdare]

1 hour ago, nessuno0505 said:

In my opinion it all depends on what Razbam is doing: if they have access to the development tools and are continuing to develop their modules, even if they do not publish updates due to the ongoing dispute, then when the dispute is resolved a big update will come out all at once and we will be back on track. If, on the other hand, Razbam has suspended the work altogether, when the dispute is over, even if favorable for them, the razbam modules will be dead and buried and it is very unlikely that they will be able to recover.

Since some users claim to be close to Razbam, can they share information about which of these two scenarios? Are they still working or not?

 

I see no reason RB is doing work while not being funded for it

Might as well wait out and gather all necessary data, then start on the matter when business issues are resolved

[SkateZilla]

1 hour ago, nessuno0505 said:

In my opinion it all depends on what Razbam is doing: if they have access to the development tools and are continuing to develop their modules, even if they do not publish updates due to the ongoing dispute, then when the dispute is resolved a big update will come out all at once and we will be back on track. If, on the other hand, Razbam has suspended the work altogether, when the dispute is over, even if favorable for them, the razbam modules will be dead and buried and it is very unlikely that they will be able to recover.

Since some users claim to be close to Razbam, can they share information about which of these two scenarios? Are they still working or not?

Take these points w/ a shot of Jameson, as they have not been confirmed by ED.

A. According to RB Devs, they lost access to dev tools etc.

B. They stopped updating because they were not wanting to continue working for free. *working in the BG would still be working for free*

C. Several members have stated they are gone already. *confirmed from those devs directly that they are already in positions elsewhere*

D. Users claiming to be close to RB, or even repeating what's been said elsewhere goes against every reason this thread exists. if it's not in an official announcement by either ED or RB Ceo/Ron, then it's speculative. That being said, the Map team is a separate entity, and I believe M2M is still working on things, because honestly most of what he does adds to their portfolio for other sims/contract/whatevers.

Edited August 16, 2024 by SkateZilla