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

[Horns]

I hope this doesn't look like conspiracy theory itself but I know I'm getting close to the line, if this must be removed so be it and if it is I apologize...

Having read the conversation, even if one grants it's genuine I honestly don't see it 'confirm' anything new that relates to the current dispute. Two guys from third parties - neither of whom run the third party the current dispute is with - speculating on the financial health of ED doesn't move the dial for me. We've already had people speculating that ED is out of money, ED are the only ones who actually know their own financial health and their motivation for actions. Shame on whoever posted that private conversation - again, assuming it's genuine - if they leaked it without Nick's agreement. What a betrayal in return for an expression of empathy.

[NineLine]

2 hours ago, Schmidtfire said:

Have you read that Skype conversation? For the first time in over 10 years, I'm actually worried for DCS as a platform.
Maybe it's all wild goose chases, but things has been kind of weird the last few months. Including almost non-existent promotion materials for Afghanistan, Chinook and FC2024.

These past months has just been awful, not only for the players but for DCS as a platform. Hopefully the dust will settle and things return to normal. 

Again, don't read too much into a conversation that was supposed to be private between two adults that was never meant to be public. I assume most people have conversations they wouldn't be proud of or interested in sharing publically. It was poor form to share it and I feel bad for the person that was not in on that decision. It just adds fuel to a fire both sides are actively trying to put out. 

Once again, I will ask people to drop that discussion here. It's not an official announcement and not an element in this disagreement that is currently going on. 

[Schmidtfire]

6 minutes ago, NineLine said:

It's not an official announcement and not an element in this disagreement that is currently going on. 

It does not make it less real. But I get it, it can get ugly quite fast if private messages are left for discussion.

Np. This thread is really for venting and I have vented my concerns   

[SkateZilla]

18 minutes ago, NineLine said:

Again, don't read too much into a conversation that was supposed to be private between two adults that was never meant to be public. I assume most people have conversations they wouldn't be proud of or interested in sharing publically. It was poor form to share it and I feel bad for the person that was not in on that decision. It just adds fuel to a fire both sides are actively trying to put out. 

Once again, I will ask people to drop that discussion here. It's not an official announcement and not an element in this disagreement that is currently going on. 

Public also doesn't understand, the entire conversation is missing the base context...  people will see what they want to.

Like I said, if people saw my skype convo's or heard my phone calls from one adult to another regarding some companies, they'd lose their minds, but it's because it's 2 adults discussing a subject off the record.

Which is why messages were deleted, it was meant to be and stay off the record.

Edited July 17, 2024 by SkateZilla

[Mizzy]

16 hours ago, afnav130 said:

There was a court case in MA just a few weeks ago that texts between two friends about a third party was entered into evidence. Methinks nobody knows the law around here. Just admit you don't want to hear or see anything that would contradict your strong, and quite frankly, unhealthy viewpoints. 

 

 

Firstly, you say texts were admissible as evidence about a third Party, can you elaborate?  You don't say if it's civil or criminal proceedings, both have very distinct juris prudentia and laws governing 'due process'. One does not have to be a Lawyer to understand this and indeed it's common knowledge. In short, some tribunals and civil proceeding allow 'hearsay', the criminal Court does not. 

[Mizzy]

16 hours ago, afnav130 said:

Methinks nobody knows the law around here. Just admit you don't want to hear or see anything that would contradict your strong, and quite frankly, unhealthy viewpoints. 

 

 

The same could apply to your own viewpoint and mindset, you don't want to believe anything that upsets that viewpoint. Telling others they are wrong because you are right is not a meaningful moot. I doubt, however' that you would admit you may be wrong.

[Blazkovitch]

30 minutes ago, Mizzy said:

Firstly, you say texts were admissible as evidence about a third Party, can you elaborate?  You don't say if it's civil or criminal proceedings, both have very distinct juris prudentia and laws governing 'due process'. One does not have to be a Lawyer to understand this and indeed it's common knowledge. In short, some tribunals and civil proceeding allow 'hearsay', the criminal Court does not. 

Also, one could argue that text messages cannot be considered private because they are not encrypted and are quite easy to spoof and/or intercept so they were allowed.

Edited July 17, 2024 by Blazkovitch

[NineLine]

Guys, Gals... everyone... we are not discussing the validity of evidence and what can and cannot be used in a court of law. Come on now.

 

[Mizzy]

44 minutes ago, NineLine said:

Guys, Gals... everyone... we are not discussing the validity of evidence and what can and cannot be used in a court of law. Come on now.

 

Hehe, just talking generically 

Mizzy

[MiG21bisFishbedL]

4 hours ago, SkateZilla said:

You should read the Skype conversations from when I was working with Thirdwire
 

I cannot emphasize this enough, ThirdWire is something else. Just wow. Loved SF2, but wow.

[afnav130]

5 hours ago, Mizzy said:

The same could apply to your own viewpoint and mindset, you don't want to believe anything that upsets that viewpoint. Telling others they are wrong because you are right is not a meaningful moot. I doubt, however' that you would admit you may be wrong.

Negative. I tend to read whatever I can and then form my ideas off of that. Black and white is easy to comprehend. I had heard stuff about the situation, so I read that as someone who didn't know what was really going on, and came away knowing exactly what is going on. Ergo, if you read the same black and white stuff and can't come to the same conclusion, then yeah, you are wrong. I have nothing in this problem. Nothing. I don't care who is wrong, what I am interesting is who is right. More people could learn something from that. 

[Hammer1-1]

3 hours ago, afnav130 said:

Negative. I tend to read whatever I can and then form my ideas off of that. Black and white is easy to comprehend. I had heard stuff about the situation, so I read that as someone who didn't know what was really going on, and came away knowing exactly what is going on. Ergo, if you read the same black and white stuff and can't come to the same conclusion, then yeah, you are wrong. I have nothing in this problem. Nothing. I don't care who is wrong, what I am interesting is who is right. More people could learn something from that. 

and some people should just let it go, move on with the rest of their lives and just fkn wait for it to be resolved.

Imagine this: me....being the angriest person I know...telling people they need to unclench, relax and just...Kim Jong Chill, Son. Please?

[Smashy]

4 hours ago, afnav130 said:

I had heard stuff about the situation, so I read that as someone who didn't know what was really going on, and came away knowing exactly what is going on.

Wow!  You know exactly what is going on?  This is great news.  Please Skype the judge to fill him in on the details so this whole thing can be wrapped up by tomorrow.  I just want my Strike Eagle development back on track.  Thanks.

[freehand]

4 hours ago, afnav130 said:

Negative. I tend to read whatever I can and then form my ideas off of that. Black and white is easy to comprehend. I had heard stuff about the situation, so I read that as someone who didn't know what was really going on, and came away knowing exactly what is going on. Ergo, if you read the same black and white stuff and can't come to the same conclusion, then yeah, you are wrong. I have nothing in this problem. Nothing. I don't care who is wrong, what I am interesting is who is right. More people could learn something from that. 

Is that riddle ?

[Mizzy]

23 hours ago, afnav130 said:

Negative. I tend to read whatever I can and then form my ideas off of that. Black and white is easy to comprehend. I had heard stuff about the situation, so I read that as someone who didn't know what was really going on, and came away knowing exactly what is going on.

There are a few problems in your statement: "I tend to read whatever I can and then form my ideas off of that" So you are expressing your ideas ! "I had heard stuff about the situation, so I read that as someone who didn't know what was really going on", you formed your ideas on hearing stuff (hear say) and came to the conclusion you now know 'exactly' what is really going on ! Did you consider what you read was actually wrong !

I don't mean to be facetious but your logic is flawed. Please refrain from telling people you are right and more people could learn from your wisdom, it comes over as offensive. That's my last word on the matter.

Mizzy

Edited July 18, 2024 by Mizzy
poor grammar

[SkateZilla]

On 7/17/2024 at 2:18 PM, NineLine said:

Guys, Gals... everyone... we are not discussing the validity of evidence and what can and cannot be used in a court of law. Come on now.

 

[maxTRX]

Court martial for both parties!  under... DCSMJ

[Nightdare]

On 7/18/2024 at 5:23 PM, Mizzy said:

There are a few problems in your statement: "I tend to read whatever I can and then form my ideas off of that" So you are expressing your ideas ! "I had heard stuff about the situation, so I read that as someone who didn't know what was really going on", you formed your ideas on hearing stuff (hear say) and came to the conclusion you now know 'exactly' what is really going on ! Did you consider what you read was actually wrong !

I don't mean to be facetious but your logic is flawed. Please refrain from telling people you are right and more people could learn from your wisdom, it comes over as offensive. That's my last word on the matter.

Mizzy

 

 

+1

Now, I'm a believer that logical deduction can bring one far in a theoretical environment, or even practical problem solving, but I'll be the first to admit that logical deduction in the end still boils down as no more than an educated guess (if that much, depending on the validity of the available- and absence of contrary- information, it might just be a convoluted brainfart)

@afnav130

"I heard stuff" isn't empirical evidence, we call those things "Rumors", it also doesn't fit the scientific method, since there is no possibility for falsification

In a back and forth between 2 parties, you're are not in an argument over if the gras is green, but choosing between "he said/she said"

One may be more plausible, but that doesn't make their position by definition true, and when come the end result, You may have been screaming to the heavens about your position being correct based on your interpretation of the available "Data", yet still be proven wrong

 

Hell, in this dispute between ED and RB, a court might even decide both are in the wrong (or both are right) and both parties end up being forced by court mandate to hold each other to their mutually signed agreements ...contracts can be funny like that

 

[RafaPolit]

I, for one, am less interested in the specifics of the lawsuit and the legal process and more interested in the "core" of the issue and what steps are all parties involved (including other 3rd party developers) doing to prevent this from happening again.

In the court:
- maybe ED triumphs, never pays Razbam and they simply abandon the project: we loose important modules, Razbam looses all their income, ED looses future sales of the modules.
- maybe Razbam triumphs, ED is forced to pay the amount, but the relationships between both parties have been damaged beyond repair: ED losses a good chunk of capital, Razbam gets their money, probably have lost all the enthusiasm to work on the project, we loose important modules or their updates / completeness
- they reach an agreement, but the confidence on third party modules has been affected, we all loose as a collective in terms of environment and peace-of-mind regarding a product we love, use and have invested (some of use ludicrous!) amount of money in (I mean DCS as a whole).

So, whoever is more clever to have written the small print in the contract and is able to convince the court will win... but, to me, that makes no real difference.  It's the unhealthy environment the 3rd party development scenario is in which concerns me, for all the parties involved:

- ED is trying to make it so that Source Code is passed to them so third party modules will not be subject to this problems in the future.  This sounds great from the users perspective, as it will ensure we keep on getting updates and getting to use the modules we paid for... but with a previous track record of failing to pay on time to third party developers (for whatever reason, but this was clearly not the first time this has happened), this is hardly an incentive to third party developers that could see their source code in control of ED and not being able to get paid for the work.  So this would be, without other clauses in place, very detrimental from a 3rd party developer's perspective
- The fact that ED could withhold payment for reasons that have nothing to do with the sales, is something I am not happy about.  Lets give ED all the benefit of the doubt and that there is a breach of contract on proprietary code sold or given away by Razbam.  That should 100% merit a court process where they demand payment, damages and compensation from Razbam, but that should not have prevented ED from paying Razbam the income made for selling the modules.  It should have been a separate process for which I would 100% stand by ED.  The issue is that ED claims that Razbam used stopping development on the modules as leverage, affecting users, when ED used payment as leverage just the same, also affecting users in the process.

So, whatever the legal outcome is, I think that the third party developer scenario needs to be completely revamped to have a triple-win scenario for ED, 3rd party developers and paying customers.  Clauses allowing 3rd party developers to sell through their own channels and then paying ED the revenue they are entitled to seems like a good way to prevent ED withholding payment (as was the case the Heatblur and the F4).  ED being able to keep on working on 3rd party code and continue development is important for us users.  ED being able to protect their IP is clearly of paramount importance.  ED must, like banks do, insure developers that they have the circulating capital to pay due revenue and not need to rely on further sells to pay for previous purchases, as that model is not sustainable (probably clauses that money cannot get loaned to a level where the company is left without the ability to pay their providers is probably very important).  My feeling here is that each party is just looking after their own interests: we users just want the modules back to a development and maintenance status without considering who gets affected in the process, Razbam just wants to get paid and that for them is more important than the users experience or EDs IP rights, and ED wants not to pay and (as I understand it) have that as collateral for the IP that was misused, without really putting users experience or Razbam's need of income to keep on developing into the picture.

I would like to hear what ED and ALL the 3rd party developers are working on to prevent this from happening in the future, and not this very specific case.  I'd like the big 3rd party developers to have a say and sit on a round table of discussions to agree all on the best course of action for all the involved.  I think most would probably agree that the 3rd party developer bubble is unhealthy at this moment and could burst catastrophically.

[exhausted]

On 7/18/2024 at 10:23 AM, Mizzy said:

There are a few problems in your statement: "I tend to read whatever I can and then form my ideas off of that" So you are expressing your ideas ! "I had heard stuff about the situation, so I read that as someone who didn't know what was really going on", you formed your ideas on hearing stuff (hear say) and came to the conclusion you now know 'exactly' what is really going on ! Did you consider what you read was actually wrong !

I don't mean to be facetious but your logic is flawed. Please refrain from telling people you are right and more people could learn from your wisdom, it comes over as offensive. That's my last word on the matter.

Mizzy

 

Wow mizzy... In a thread where others are discussing contracts and admissibility, your understanding of hearsay is wrong. When someone is trying to educate themselves and discuss, it is your role to not police discussion and tell people they are invalid simply because you don't personally agree. What kind of logic are you using anyways? Hearsay is when an out of court statement is being used to prove the truth of what the statement is about, and it is used for its actual evidentiary value in several ways, even in court. 

[Hammer1-1]

Hearsay is rarely taken as conjectural evidence because its 2-3 degrees of separation. Only in the political world is hearsay even remotely acceptable AND EVEN THEN you can be considered a total dirtbag for doing so. If you cant cross examine the person who actually said it, even if it IS the truth, its 100% unverified until otherwise.

[exhausted]

3 minutes ago, Hammer1-1 said:

Hearsay is rarely taken as conjectural evidence because its 2-3 degrees of separation. Only in the political world is hearsay even remotely acceptable AND EVEN THEN you can be considered a total dirtbag for doing so. If you cant cross examine the person who actually said it, even if it IS the truth, its 100% unverified until otherwise.

That's not at all the case here. The biggest issue with this is that neither party is going to answer us, so there is no way to cross examine them in anyway, so no matter what they say we are capable of judging their truthfulness as we may see fit. But hearsay is probably not harmful here, as these statements largely go back to the people who made them at various stages, and given that they largely cut against their interests, it would make those party statements more trustworthy as they don't have a reason to tell a lie that harms them.  

Edited July 22, 2024 by exhausted

[Hammer1-1]

Hearsay without actual evidence is just that: hearsay. They arent talking; its not doing anyone a bit of good going through everything everywhere and mishmashing everything you find into something that only YOU define. Hearsay is nothing  but straight up conjecture, and if you CAN'T verify it to be 100% -and nothing less than- straight from the horses mouth, then we -as users- can just consider it worthless information. Honestly I dont even know why the moderators havent shut this topic down specifically because of the hearsay because its not productive at all.

Edited July 22, 2024 by Hammer1-1

[NineLine]

46 minutes ago, Hammer1-1 said:

Hearsay without actual evidence is just that: hearsay. They arent talking; its not doing anyone a bit of good going through everything everywhere and mishmashing everything you find into something that only YOU define. Hearsay is nothing  but straight up conjecture, and if you CAN'T verify it to be 100% -and nothing less than- straight from the horses mouth, then we -as users- can just consider it worthless information. Honestly I dont even know why the moderators havent shut this topic down specifically because of the hearsay because its not productive at all.

 

We occasionally come on here and ask people to stay focused on the official announcements and the few things that have happened and have been noted. All the other stuff can be labelled however anyone wants but it's all really white noise around a frustrating issue. There are elements out there that want to stir the pot, drag in other subjects and drum up noise in the hopes of getting something right. The bottom line is, and remains that all official information should come from official announcements, anything official will be put in the original post here and beyond that the rest is all about people wanting to 'figure' things out.

Why not close this thread? It will just open somewhere else, people want to chat about things, and some people hear some of these stories and want to know what is up. We need a place where we can all just come and vent a little or ask questions. This is the place for us here. Don't think I haven't wanted to close this a few times, but that's also just me being human and having my own frustrations in this situation. 

[Hammer1-1]

1 hour ago, NineLine said:

 

Why not close this thread?

Because its devolved into a "they said 'he said/she said'". I get the whole "people need a place to vent their anger and frustration, but to me it seems like that exit has passed. Seems like Ive left this thread 5 times in the last 3 weeks only to return to a Beavis and Butthead episode and thats embarrassing in its own rights. The ED forums already isnt known to bring out the best in people, but this topic is just devoid of actual substance, intellect and IMO sanity. Stick, meet Dead Horse. Dead Horse, Stick. At least Beavis and Butthead was funny for a little while...Ive already survived one heart attack and you dont want one of those because thats where this threads headed.