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

[Nasder]

1 hour ago, nessuno0505 said:

I do not want to blame BD or any other external contractor hired to write the manual (by the way, why would RB need to hire someone to write the manual for something they are developing themself?); moreover, if the airplane is incomplete, how can the manual be complete? Nevertheless, neither the plane nor the manual should be incomplete if a product is declared complete and out of early access.

They could be awesome as making things, but be lousy at making manuals. It would be more costeffective to outsource the manual than to hire someone to the company to work on manuals if you don't make that many manuals.

[nessuno0505]

1 ora fa, Esac_mirmidon ha scritto:

Hind, i mean hint....

The Hind is in early access, not a so called "complete" module. I have never bought early access modules, considering that label a protection in favor of the buyer. If we start declaring complete products that are not, the whole sales model collapses and the impression that the users get is that you just want to squeeze money out of them.

[BIGNEWY]

please dont derail this topic, keep it for the RAZBAM discussion. 

 

[Oceandar]

Last question first, people ask me, I answer. It might be "what are you playing now?" or "What would you recommend", my answers have changed over the last 6 or 8 months. If they ask why I'm not playing DCS anymore, I'll tell them.
I have a picture in my mind of who's to blame, and who's responsible for a solution. 
In a Reddit thread I am not allowed to refer to there are quite a few tidbits that don't reflect well on ED. Not bashing, actual supported facts. The Razbam conflict is not the first one ED has had. Previously Heatblur had to ask for and later even threaten legal action in august 2019. ED withheld payment to Heatblur for a very long time.
Razbam must have done something as well. But withholding payment so a third party developer can't continue anymore is in my opinion a very vile action. And to continue selling products from a third party and keeping the money is theft in my book. 

I also read Reddit regarding this the other day with an open mind, and it was quite convincing

[Mizzy]

10 hours ago, Citizen said:

Hold on a second, there's no indication money has changed hands where the Tucano is concerned.

Firstly, who said anything about money changing hands! Please read what I said, my wording was 'financial gain' and this can come in many different ways and avenues, unless you know Razbam were using EDs IP for no financial gain either presently or in the future and were giving EDs IP free of charge which is a serious violation?. The latter you don't know because that is confidential.

Secondly, as far as the Tucano is concerned (I didn't know there was an aircraft called that so thanks) you do not know if the the IP dispute is concerned solely about the development of this aircraft (if it actually is) because nobody knows what the dispute is fully about. It's certainly not about paying Razbam and their unprofessional approach in bringing a private dispute into the public domain where it's been manipulated into the mantra 'pay Razbam'.

For me, this is quite a despicable and reckless act by Zambrano because he's dividing this community with a very selective reason why this dispute has come to light. He has shown he is not worthy of publishing other peoples developments for DCS any longer by his actions against the Platform he was publishing for. So, when people say that Zambrano's actions are shady, I have to agree, afterall, he's just a salesman and salesmen/women tend to be a bit shifty, in my opinion of course,

Mizzy

[Mizzy]

13 minutes ago, Oceandar said:

16 hours ago, Koriel said:

Last question first, people ask me, I answer. It might be "what are you playing now?" or "What would you recommend", my answers have changed over the last 6 or 8 months. If they ask why I'm not playing DCS anymore, I'll tell them.
I have a picture in my mind of who's to blame, and who's responsible for a solution. 
In a Reddit thread I am not allowed to refer to there are quite a few tidbits that don't reflect well on ED. Not bashing, actual supported facts. The Razbam conflict is not the first one ED has had. Previously Heatblur had to ask for and later even threaten legal action in august 2019. ED withheld payment to Heatblur for a very long time.
Razbam must have done something as well. But withholding payment so a third party developer can't continue anymore is in my opinion a very vile action. And to continue selling products from a third party and keeping the money is theft in my book. 

I also read Reddit regarding this the other day with an open mind, and it was quite convincing

You may have an open mind, they don't and they are good at making misinformation look 'quite convincing' However, you will get an instant ban if you question their quite convincing misinformation.

[Koty]

52 minutes ago, Mizzy said:

You may have an open mind, they don't and they are good at making misinformation look 'quite convincing' However, you will get an instant ban if you question their quite convincing misinformation.

This is, in fact, misinformation. How ironic.

On the one hand, people ask for transparency, on the other hand, when faced with said transparency, they talk about making a private matter public. Or would you have prefered the development to be paused with no word out as of to why or that it is even happening? Whether you choose to accept only information from ED or not is up to you, but please, try not to throw logic out the window.

You are right there is still information being kept private, for legal reasons. But with that in mind, why the need to speculate?

[Joe1978]

hace 14 horas, Esac_mirmidon dijo:

.... But a sketch is something different. Baltic Dragon deserves some respect

 

Sorry, a quick note, and please don't misunderstand;  that there are missions/campaigns from RB planes (reportedly created by BD) that have been malfunctioning for years. 

You can continue with the discussion, thanks 

 

 

[Mizzy]

1 hour ago, Koty said:

This is, in fact, misinformation. How ironic.

On the one hand, people ask for transparency, on the other hand, when faced with said transparency, they talk about making a private matter public. Or would you have prefered the development to be paused with no word out as of to why or that it is even happening? Whether you choose to accept only information from ED or not is up to you, but please, try not to throw logic out the window.

You are right there is still information being kept private, for legal reasons. But with that in mind, why the need to speculate?

Firstly, I must have missed your so called logic, anyway, my logic is simple, there are three official statements only, all else is speculation which is what you are doing ironically.

Secondly, It would have been preferrable for Zambrano to tell the truth about the nature of the dispute rather than claiming he hasn't been paid as the cause which is palpably untrue, there is more to this and he knows that.

Anything else?

 

 

Edited October 30, 2024 by Mizzy

[Koty]

I'm not sure which part of what I said is a speculation, but whatever.

[Citizen]

2 hours ago, Mizzy said:

The latter you don't know because that is confidential.

I've seen the correspondence between the lawyers.

[BIGNEWY]

folks if you dont read the rules you will get warning points, read them and apply them or do not post here. 

thank you 

[MiG21bisFishbedL]

20 hours ago, ssn said:

I see this funny theory repeated over and over here. That somehow ED hands are tied w.r.t. continued sales, but they are not where it comes to payment for the said sales.

Those are two entirely different things. And, since both ED and Razbam have made it clear that they are working toward a solution this might be something expected of ED to continue to do for Razbam or they may face penalties.

All of that has nothing to do with the price of eggs, though. If RB breached contract, they breached contract. Simple as. The answer is to not then go and do something equally damaging and make the situation absolutely untenable. That only harms the consumer even further than this mess already has. The Reddit outrage click machine doesn't need further fuel.

Edited October 30, 2024 by MiG21bisFishbedL

[Mizzy]

1 hour ago, Citizen said:

I've seen the correspondence between the lawyers.

Really, so Razbam have divulged the details of the dispute, care to elaborate? 

[Citizen]

15 minutes ago, Mizzy said:

Really, so Razbam have divulged the details of the dispute, care to elaborate? 

If you'd like me to, sure.

First off, I believe this came from EDs side.  When someone at RB wants to say something, they just say it.  When a whistleblower at ED wants to leak something, they use an intermediary.

RB wanted to make a Tucano for both MCS and DCS.  As you are likely aware, the hardest part of module development is access to documentation and SMEs.  Ron had a plan to obtain those resources from the Ecuadorian Air Force in exchange for covering their costs to use the module once it went live.  RB, ED, and EDMS would benefit by being able to sell the module to other professional entities that operate the type and consumers like us like any other module.

Nick appears to have been made aware and was supportive of the project, but no contract was ever signed.  Perhaps Ron felt it wouldn't be necessary since they were at a relatively early point in the process, but whatever the reason it was clearly a poor decision.

Approximately half a year to a year after F-15E royalties would be due, RB was informed that ED considered the Tucano project a breach of IP.  Now, perhaps Nick decided to reverse his previous support of the project and without a contract, that would be his right to do so.  RB stopped work immediately and thus solved any potential harm.

ED is maintaining that despite the alleged harm being solved, they are entitled to an amount that is a bit more than half of the F-15E royalties due to RB.  I have my suspicions as to why ED hasn't paid the difference as a show of good faith but that's beyond the scope of the correspondence between counsels.  The current status is RB demanding the full amount of royalties and ED asking RB to 'take a broader view'.

[av8orDave]

42 minutes ago, Citizen said:

If you'd like me to, sure.

First off, I believe this came from EDs side.  When someone at RB wants to say something, they just say it.  When a whistleblower at ED wants to leak something, they use an intermediary.

RB wanted to make a Tucano for both MCS and DCS.  As you are likely aware, the hardest part of module development is access to documentation and SMEs.  Ron had a plan to obtain those resources from the Ecuadorian Air Force in exchange for covering their costs to use the module once it went live.  RB, ED, and EDMS would benefit by being able to sell the module to other professional entities that operate the type and consumers like us like any other module.

Nick appears to have been made aware and was supportive of the project, but no contract was ever signed.  Perhaps Ron felt it wouldn't be necessary since they were at a relatively early point in the process, but whatever the reason it was clearly a poor decision.

Approximately half a year to a year after F-15E royalties would be due, RB was informed that ED considered the Tucano project a breach of IP.  Now, perhaps Nick decided to reverse his previous support of the project and without a contract, that would be his right to do so.  RB stopped work immediately and thus solved any potential harm.

ED is maintaining that despite the alleged harm being solved, they are entitled to an amount that is a bit more than half of the F-15E royalties due to RB.  I have my suspicions as to why ED hasn't paid the difference as a show of good faith but that's beyond the scope of the correspondence between counsels.  The current status is RB demanding the full amount of royalties and ED asking RB to 'take a broader view'.

This is interesting. Having lived a good number of these types of disputes in my work life, a few thoughts:

- You say "RB wanted to make a Tucano for both MCS and DCS" and that "Ron had a plan to obtain those resources... etc."; Did Razbam enter into a formal contract / agreement with the Ecuadorian Air Force regarding this? What did that contract say? Would they have to provide certain things to the Ecuadorian Air Force? Were they empowered to provide those things? These are the types of details that matter in a business to business legal dispute. It isn't as "straight-forward" as many people seem to want to make it seem.

- You say "Nick appears to have been made aware and was supportive... etc"; How was he made aware? Did he say something to the effect of "Ok, move ahead, but you need to get the contract in place with us to do this the right way" or something to that effect? Again, the details that are missing are really the things that matter.

- You say "RB stopped work immediately and thus solved any potential harm"; According to who was any potential harm solved? You? Razbam? Doesn't seem like that is ED's perspective.

I appreciate your post and it is interesting information, but it seems like were also still left with lots of blanks and "what-ifs" surrounding details that matter. At the end of the day, only time will tell as to what the resolution will be. My only point is that there isn't enough info available to say who caused what.

[Mizzy]

56 minutes ago, Citizen said:

If you'd like me to, sure.

First off, I believe this came from EDs side.  When someone at RB wants to say something, they just say it.  When a whistleblower at ED wants to leak something, they use an intermediary.

RB wanted to make a Tucano for both MCS and DCS.  As you are likely aware, the hardest part of module development is access to documentation and SMEs.  Ron had a plan to obtain those resources from the Ecuadorian Air Force in exchange for covering their costs to use the module once it went live.  RB, ED, and EDMS would benefit by being able to sell the module to other professional entities that operate the type and consumers like us like any other module.

Nick appears to have been made aware and was supportive of the project, but no contract was ever signed.  Perhaps Ron felt it wouldn't be necessary since they were at a relatively early point in the process, but whatever the reason it was clearly a poor decision.

Approximately half a year to a year after F-15E royalties would be due, RB was informed that ED considered the Tucano project a breach of IP.  Now, perhaps Nick decided to reverse his previous support of the project and without a contract, that would be his right to do so.  RB stopped work immediately and thus solved any potential harm.

ED is maintaining that despite the alleged harm being solved, they are entitled to an amount that is a bit more than half of the F-15E royalties due to RB.  I have my suspicions as to why ED hasn't paid the difference as a show of good faith but that's beyond the scope of the correspondence between counsels.  The current status is RB demanding the full amount of royalties and ED asking RB to 'take a broader view'.

Wow, do you have evidence of this? Is it official? If it is, we now know what the dispute is all about and no need to speculate. I think this should be on the front page, don't you !

Mizzy

Something has just occurred to me, why has Zambrano used the 'we have not been paid' when he obviously knew fine well what the dispute was all about. Why did he portray the notion that he wasn't aware of all this and a situation they never asked for, or words to that effect. So, he deliberately miss represented the dispute and caused all this rift when it was unnecessary to do so!! 

Edited October 30, 2024 by Mizzy
PS message

[Koty]

1 minute ago, Mizzy said:

Wow, do you have evidence of this? Is it official? If it is, we now know what the dispute is all about and no need to speculate. I think this should be on the front page, don't you !

Mizzy

If I can be honest, you claiming that the leak, regardless whether it's real or not, must have come from rb is already a big speculation.

 

[Mizzy]

7 minutes ago, Koty said:

If I can be honest, you claiming that the leak, regardless whether it's real or not, must have come from rb is already a big speculation.

 

I think we have moved on from this trivial and childish topic. Who said it was a 'Leak' btw?

PS Bignewy, has answered your question, if there is a real document out there, it came from RB, not speculation. Let it go now.

Edited October 30, 2024 by Mizzy

[BIGNEWY]

Folks please just stop 

If there are documents out there it isn't from us, I'm sure you can decide in your own minds if it is the right or wrong thing to do. 

Its not really a concern for this thread. 

Thank you 

[NineLine]

Everything official is in the first post, that is all we are discussing here. Thanks. 

[scommander2]

A quick question about the newer release for:

Quote

DCS: South Atlantic Map by RAZBAM

New:

• New custom Helo Pads around main cities and in popular areas (a lot more to come)
• Added extra low detail grass for improved low level visuals

Fixed:

• Normals not showing correctly in tree'd areas (error from last update)
• Optimisations across road networks
• Corrected FLIR on some traffic vehicles
• Corrected texture mismatch on different road merging junctions
• Various models Z-fighting fixed
• Removed model errors from logs
• South West side fields at Punta Arenas have been adjusted

Were they really fixed by RB?

Sorry about off-topic from F-15E...

[NineLine]

8 minutes ago, scommander2 said:

A quick question about the newer release for:

Were they really fixed by RB?

Sorry about off-topic from F-15E...

The map team is separate from the main RB group, and only published by RB. So yes, that team has continued to work during this time. 

[nessuno0505]

If all the story is true, it is absurd that a dispute over a presumed and yet unexistent future module falls on the paying customers of an existing product. If this is true, the blame must be shared between RB and ED, and that says a lot about the trustworthiness of both companies.

[virgo47]

Because we know nothing officially, either it was about such an incredible amount of money that it was worth the risk for either side... or it's just a muscle contest that obviously favours ED, but weakens everybody. How is RB starved of money good for the whole community is beyond me. How is the whole DCS ecosystem better without RB, ditto. And I have no idea why this takes forever (at least it seems so).

Or it's a completely different story - and hopefully, I'll be still alive when it's settled. It takes so long it feels like a lack of good will on one or both sides. And when legal guys/gals are involved, it's a waste of money for all of us (although not necessarily for one side). That said, I'm generally patient. But not oblivious to the context of this quite prolonged dispute.