Quake Champions captures the franchise’s fast and deadly feel, and adds a few new caveats taken from the more modern “hero” shooter trend that freshen the formula.
The post Quake Champions: Our First Take appeared first on Digital Trends.
Id Software’s CTO promotes the benefits of using AMD’s new Ryzen CPUs
AMD uploaded a two-minute clip featuring Id Software CTO Robert Duffy. He talks about the benefits of the new Ryzen desktop CPUs, stating that any PC game will benefit from the processing headroom provided by AMD's desktop chips.
The post Id Software’s CTO promotes the benefits of using AMD’s new Ryzen CPUs appeared first on Digital Trends.
You can play ‘Quake Champions’ on April 6, if you get into the closed beta
The closed beta for Quake Champions is set to start in a week, which means if you want to be part of it, you will need to register your interest as soon as possible. Get your game face ready.
The post You can play ‘Quake Champions’ on April 6, if you get into the closed beta appeared first on Digital Trends.
‘Quake Champions’ does free-to-play right with its Champions Pack
You will be able to compete across every map in Quake Champions for free and unlock additional Champions with in-game currency, but for permanent access to the whole cast of characters, there's a one-time fee
The post ‘Quake Champions’ does free-to-play right with its Champions Pack appeared first on Digital Trends.
Oculus exec John Carmack launches $22.5M lawsuit against ZeniMax Media
Oculus VR chief technology officer John Carmack has filed a $22.5M lawsuit against his former employer, ZeniMax Media, claiming that the company still owes him money from its purchase of id Software in 2009.
The post Oculus exec John Carmack launches $22.5M lawsuit against ZeniMax Media appeared first on Digital Trends.
$4 Billion ZeniMax v. Oculus Verdict Could Come as Early as Today, Here’s What You Need to Know
This week the eyes of the virtual reality industry are on a federal court in Dallas, Texas where ZeniMax (and child company id Software) and Facebook (and child company Oculus) have been engaged in legal battle over a dispute which could cost Facebook $4 billion. ZeniMax alleges that a former employee used VR code that it owned after being hired by Oculus, and further that Facebook should have known that the code was ZeniMax property. With jury deliberations now starting, a verdict could come as soon as today. Here’s what you need to know about the case.
Guest Article by Brian Sommer, IME Law
Brian is an interactive media and entertainment attorney at IME Law, where he focuses his practice on the intersection of traditional entertainment and immersive media. He also serves as Co-Chair of the VRARA Licensing Committee. You can follow Brian on Twitter @arvrlaw, and @IME_Law.
For 13 days, attorneys in the Dallas federal court have been selling the jury very different stories. “One of the biggest technology heists ever” is how ZeniMax attorney Tony Sammi described to jurors Facebook’s acquisition of Oculus in opening statements.╫ In Thursday’s closing arguments, Oculus attorney Beth Wilkinson told jurors ZeniMax and Id Software are “jealous, they’re angry and they’re embarrassed” over the success of Oculus and the acquisition by Facebook.╫
At first blush, this lawsuit appears to be a complicated mess involving two plaintiffs, five defendants, nine causes of action, over 900 court filings (many sealed from the public) and a demand for more than $4 billion in damages. Without having access to many of the critical motions filed in the case (due in part to the Court’s order sealing such filings), it is not possible to assess in exacting detail certain critical arguments made by each side. But, from arguments, publicly-available filings and reports that have been made available to the public, it appears that the essence of the lawsuit can be distilled down to this: this is a dispute about who owns the intellectual property (“IP”) that was vital in creating the Oculus Rift.
Will the jury agree with ZeniMax that its proprietary computer code was a foundational component of Oculus’ success, or will the jury side with the defense’s argument that Oculus code was developed independently and based upon publicly known code and different solutions?
Starting today, jurors begin sorting through hundreds of facts and applying them to the issues contained in the jury instructions, weighing the credibility of witness testimony and evidence presented. Here are three key issues that could drive jury deliberations:
1. Did Palmer Luckey and Oculus Misappropriate IP That Zenimax Disclosed Through a Nondisclosure Agreement?
Defendant John Carmack is heralded as one of the most recognized and accomplished video game programmers and virtual reality engineers in the industry today. He co-founded Id Software (plaintiff), which was later acquired by ZeniMax (plaintiff). In April 2012, while employed as Id Software’s Technical Director, Carmack discovered through an Internet forum that Palmer Luckey (defendant)—who would go on to become the founder of Oculus—had developed a prototype virtual reality headset called the “Rift.” Carmack contacted Luckey, and Luckey sent Carmack a very early Rift prototype. Carmack is alleged to have immediately started to evaluate, analyze and modify the Rift prototype using research, software code and tools owned by id Software.
Carmack and Luckey’s friendship quickly turned business-like by May 2012 when Luckey in his personal capacity signed a nondisclosure agreement (“NDA”) with Id Software’s parent company ZeniMax, according to information from the case.
Companies use NDAs to ensure ideas or trade secrets disclosed to another party remain confidential. NDAs usually prohibit the recipient of confidential information from using or disclosing any information that they receive under the NDA, except for agreed purposes. Since an NDA is a contract, all of the legal principles surrounding contract law (e.g., elements needed to form a contract, defenses, etc.) are used to analyze an alleged breach of an NDA.
In June 2012, Luckey formed Oculus on the heels of successful demonstrations by Carmack (employed at the time by ZeniMax) and Luckey at the E3 Convention. ZeniMax alleges that through early 2013, and while bound by the NDA, Carmack and other Id Software employees collaborated with Oculus and Luckey to debug and refine the Rift.
ZeniMax alleges Luckey breached the NDA by taking ZeniMax-owned proprietary information and then using it without permission and disclosing it to Facebook. Oculus and Luckey contend the NDA is unenforceable for a number of reasons, including because the NDA was signed by Luckey in his personal capacity before Oculus was founded, a key material term was never defined, and for other legally nuanced reasons. In response, plaintiffs assert that Oculus is bound by the NDA because Oculus is a mere continuation of Luckey’s prior work. The jury’s outcome may hinge on the many factual findings related to the NDA.
Continue Reading on Page 2 >>
The post $4 Billion ZeniMax v. Oculus Verdict Could Come as Early as Today, Here’s What You Need to Know appeared first on Road to VR.
Jury Still Deciding ZeniMax v. Oculus Case (UPDATE)
Update Jan. 31. Still no verdict. The jury returns for additional deliberations on Wednesday, Feb. 1.
Update Jan. 30: The jury did not make a decision today in a Texas case brought by ZeniMax against Oculus. They will return for additional deliberations on Tuesday, Jan. 31.
Original story published Jan. 27:
Although Mark Zuckerberg already left the Earle Cabell Federal Court building last Monday, UploadVR continued to attend and take notes throughout the rest of the trial. Each side has now delivered its closing arguments, and a jury is likely to decide on Monday whether or not Oculus delivered a convincing defense from allegations the company misappropriated technology from ZeniMax.
“Facebook knew,” ZeniMax lawyer Tony Sammi said in his closing argument. “Zuckerberg may have never heard about it, but his lawyers knew.”
Both the plaintiff (ZeniMax) and defendant (Oculus VR, represented by Beth Wilkinson) have called more witnesses and experts to the stand over the last week. Wilkinson made her final argument to the jury on Jan. 26. She addressed ZeniMax’s allegations that Palmer Luckey’s origin story is a fabrication, and the Oculus Rift was built using its source code and trade secrets. She argued that Oculus’ founders all shared a vision.
“They want to bring this technology to life,” said Wilkinson.
She argued ZeniMax had the opportunity to make a deal with Oculus but didn’t because it didn’t want to work with a bunch of “clowns” and that VR technology was, according to CEO Robert A. Altman, “unproven technology that has failed again and again.” Wilkinson also claimed Altman refused to answer one of her questions 16 times, and failed to stick to his story.
ZeniMax argued an NDA Palmer Luckey signed was meant to protect its trade secrets.
“The reason for the NDA was to demo the game and get people excited about the headset,” explained Wilkinson.
Wilkinson characterized ZeniMax as being “jealous, angry, very embarrassed,” and said ZeniMax had several opportunities to contact them if they were concerned about Oculus using its technology, such as when Oculus launched its Kickstarter video.
“[Altman] saw it, and he didn’t do a thing about it,” said Wilkinson. “He didn’t do anything about it because he knew it was to their benefit.”
What did John Carmack contribute to Oculus?
Altman, CEO of ZeniMax, was the first to answer questions this week. During his testimony, he disclosed his working relationship with John Carmack and how “disappointed” he was when he found out he was leaving id Software to work for Oculus.
Altman said, “our technology is the foundation of their business. They wouldn’t have a business without us.”
Oculus believes the ZeniMax litigation is an “attempt to take credit for technology that it did not have the vision, expertise, or patience to build,” so former Oculus engineer Steven LaValle and software engineer Nirav Patel discussed their work during their testimonies. Patel said he focused on designing better sensors while LaValle said he independently developed predictive tracking.
John Carmack complimented Patel for his work, writing to him in an email, “that is exactly what I hoped to see on the latency graphs. It looks like you’re doing it right.” When asked if he found Carmack’s advice to be useful, Patel replied, “No, not particularly,” and gave Carmack some advice of his own. Sammi fired back, asking Patel if Carmack’s opinions could classify as “technical feedback.”
Additionally, Sammi asks about a “heated exchange” LaValle remembers hearing in which former Oculus CEO Brendan Iribe told co-founder Jack McCauley, “don’t interact with John Carmack’.” Sammi brought up portions of several emails throughout the trial in an attempt to paint Carmack as instrumental to the company’s success. ZeniMax also called Tim Willits, creative director at id Software, who testified that ZeniMax was a great fit culturally with Oculus.
“We felt that they were on the same page as us – not just with business but also culture,” he said.
Are supposed trade secrets actually in the public domain?
ZeniMax alleges it was key in developing the following “trade secrets”: distortion correction, chromatic aberration, gravity orientation and sensor drift, head and neck model, predictive tracking, HMD view bypass, and time warp.
Both ZeniMax and Oculus called on several independent experts to determine whether there was infringement and plagiarism of code. Last week, we reported Professor David Dobkin said he found evidence of ZeniMax techniques used by Oculus. Wilkinson argued on behalf of Oculus that there are multiple ways to achieve the same solution, but Dobkin nevertheless stated he is “absolutely certain Oculus copied from ZeniMax code.”
This week, Oculus called a pair of independent VR experts to analyze Dobkins’ report. They suggested Oculus used different methodology in developing its approach and questioned whether ZeniMax publicly disclosed its trade secrets.
So what’s the verdict?
Yesterday, just before letting everyone go home, the judge announced there will be no more testimony. The jury has today and the weekend to consider its verdict and whether any money is owed.
Tagged with: carmack, court, facebook, id software, lawsuit, mark zuckerberg, oculus, palmer luckey, trial, zenimax