Overclock.net banner

[engadget] Mark Zuckerburg defends Oculus in court against VR rival

2K views 29 replies 24 participants last post by  Niobium 
#1 ·
Quote:
Facebook founder Mark Zuckerberg was grilled in court this morning over the creation of the Oculus Rift VR headset, as part of a $2 billion lawsuit brought by ZeniMax Media. ZeniMax -- the owner of Bethesda Softworks, id Software and other video game studios -- says Oculus chief technology officer John Carmack stole ZeniMax's intellectual property when he left the company in 2013. Essentially, ZeniMax argues that it owns the technological foundation behind the Oculus Rift VR headset.
Source

~TLDR Zuckerberg sued for $2 Billion by ZeniMax (Bethesda / ID software). They say John Carmack stole their intellectual property when he left in 2013.

Quite a big lawsuit. I could see the ruling going either way. I hope the judge is tech savvy.
 
#3 ·
Quote:
Originally Posted by Laysson View Post

Keep hoping, let him first be a justice / unbiased / incorruptible savvy first
tongue.gif
The key being, aware of themselves and having the capability to understand these concepts. No one is without bias really but if you know it, you can make sure you don't act on it.. well, not many act on it constructively.

I'm guessing there's one capable judge per state maximum
tongue.gif


Zuckerberg is doing something quite personal for one of the richest men in the world... I guess he truly believes in what he saw could occur in VR.
 
#5 ·
I've decided I'm biased on the subject.

Best outcome: ZeniMax wins lawsuit, releases their own VR competitor and Oculus stays in the industry.
Worst outcome: ZeniMax wins lawsuit, doesn't release VR or takes years to release, and Oculus is no longer available for purchase.
Decent outcome: Zuckerburg wins, nothing happens.

Obviously I'm hoping for the best outcome. More VR competitors, lower prices and better specs.

I've no idea what the intellectual property laws are, perhaps someone could shed light on it. Carmack obviously learned stuff while working at Id Software, it's only natural he would use that knowledge in future jobs. The question is how similar the code is and how exact it needs to be for the courts to rule as theft.
 
#6 ·
Quote:
Originally Posted by 1Kaz View Post

I've decided I'm biased on the subject.

Best outcome: ZeniMax wins lawsuit, releases their own VR competitor and Oculus stays in the industry.
Worst outcome: ZeniMax wins lawsuit, doesn't release VR or takes years to release, and Oculus is no longer available for purchase.
Decent outcome: Zuckerburg wins, nothing happens.

Obviously I'm hoping for the best outcome. More VR competitors, lower prices and better specs.

I've no idea what the intellectual property laws are, perhaps someone could shed light on it. Carmack obviously learned stuff while working at Id Software, it's only natural he would use that knowledge in future jobs. The question is how similar the code is and how exact it needs to be for the courts to rule as theft.
ZeniMax shouldn't win, they were given the opportunity to get on board with Oculus back before Facebook bought the company. ZeniMax declined and didn't think VR would be anything big. Now that Facebook sunk huge money into it and VR is taking off ZeniMax is just sueing cause they want a piece of the pie they passed on originally.

I do suspect John Carmack most likely did work on Oculus code on an ID Software company computer, since he worked for both companies at once and he seems like one of those guys who tinkers with ideas and hobbies and the ideas come regardless. That seems to eb the whole basis of ZeniMax's claim, that since the code was worked on in an ID Soft computer, even though it was not for an ID project it is now owned by ZeniMax. Which is true according to contract, but it is still wrong and ZeniMax is only trying to grab free money cause they realized their mistake.
 
#8 ·
It's Facebook versus Zenimax. I can't think of a more abhorrent match-up. Is there a scenario where they both lose? That would be terrific.

I guess it would be cool to see Electronic Arts versus Exxon, though it's hard to imagine the scenario.
 
#10 ·
Quote:
Originally Posted by tp4tissue View Post

Don't care, VR is a flop in all current implementations..

we're YEARS AND YEARS away from a vr solution that WORKS WITH the eye.

Look up vergence accomodation reflex..

All current headsets are fixed focus.. breaking our natural brain reflex.
Although I can agree that it can only grow, calling it a flop is a bit far fetched. I think members of my household would die laughing at that comment.

As much as I hate FB we really don't want Occulus to fail. Competition spurs development and that's a win for us all. Now back to playing in my Vive.
 
#11 ·
Quote:
Originally Posted by EniGma1987 View Post

ZeniMax shouldn't win, they were given the opportunity to get on board with Oculus back before Facebook bought the company. ZeniMax declined and didn't think VR would be anything big. Now that Facebook sunk huge money into it and VR is taking off ZeniMax is just sueing cause they want a piece of the pie they passed on originally.

I do suspect John Carmack most likely did work on Oculus code on an ID Software company computer, since he worked for both companies at once and he seems like one of those guys who tinkers with ideas and hobbies and the ideas come regardless. That seems to eb the whole basis of ZeniMax's claim, that since the code was worked on in an ID Soft computer, even though it was not for an ID project it is now owned by ZeniMax. Which is true according to contract, but it is still wrong and ZeniMax is only trying to grab free money cause they realized their mistake.
Doesn't really matter. If you took someone's music, or partially created music, and used it to create an album that's considered completely original and skyrockets to the top of the charts for months on end... you best be damned to believe that you'd hound that guy upon learning what they stole from you. Content theft is just that, THEFT.
 
#12 ·
Quote:
Originally Posted by Imglidinhere View Post

Doesn't really matter. If you took someone's music, or partially created music, and used it to create an album that's considered completely original and skyrockets to the top of the charts for months on end... you best be damned to believe that you'd hound that guy upon learning what they stole from you. Content theft is just that, THEFT.
He did not take something ZeniMax created though, John Carmack wrote the code. The issue is whether that code belongs to ZeniMax, or if it was created under Oculus.
 
#14 ·
Quote:
Originally Posted by EniGma1987 View Post

He did not take something ZeniMax created though, John Carmack wrote the code. The issue is whether that code belongs to ZeniMax, or if it was created under Oculus.
He apparently wrote the code while working for Zenimax therefore Zenimax own the code which he acknowledges.

However, he claims he wrote new code for Oculus which is the tricky part because Zenimax claim he stole the code he wrote for zenimax using a flash drive.

Should be an interesting case.
 
#15 ·
Quote:
Originally Posted by tp4tissue View Post

Don't care, VR is a flop in all current implementations..

we're YEARS AND YEARS away from a vr solution that WORKS WITH the eye.

Look up vergence accomodation reflex..

All current headsets are fixed focus.. breaking our natural brain reflex.
I would not go as far as to say it was a flop. It has a way to go before I hop on board and I do not beleive it will go mainstream just yet but it certainly has not failed. All in all VR is still in its infancy as far as the technology goes.
 
#17 ·
If they can prove he copy and pasted stolen code then that's one thing and they're perfectly justified in their suit. However it sounds more like the typical corporate garbage of where they think they own the knowledge and experience a person gained while working for them.

But I believe in capitalism and am of the opinion that patents and copyrights are about as backwards and evil and un-capitalist as it can be, so I don't care if he did steal their code.
 
#18 ·
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cavey00 View Post

Although I can agree that it can only grow, calling it a flop is a bit far fetched. I think members of my household would die laughing at that comment.

As much as I hate FB we really don't want Occulus to fail. Competition spurs development and that's a win for us all. Now back to playing in my Vive.
Agreed, the more VR competition, the better for us consumers. My whole household would be laughing at the flop comment also. We can't get enough.
 
#20 ·
At this rate, my father should sue me for ignoring my near begging for him to invest in Nvidia at $25 in February 2016 because now, he didn't gain an absurd return on his investment in such a short period. Or maybe his ignoring of the chance gives me grounds to sue him for money that, simply didn't exist at the time. This is true stuff but it's the same concept; Zenimax feels entitled to something they failed in paying due attention to and would scramble prehistoric technicalities that aren't in line with the times of today, in order to take what they could have had significant income from.

True story regarding the desperate begging I made for him to invest into Nvidia ignored by my father, though he just tries to ignore that it happened now, after being sheepish when it hit just $46, I can't imagine how it felt when it breached capped at $120. But alas, my father can't sue me for his oversights; Zenimax seems to believe they can. Clearly ignoring something is definitely not their fault.
 
#21 ·
Quote:
Originally Posted by rbarrett96 View Post

Take the same advice as you got when the Winklevoss twins wanted 60 mil. Just pay it, it amounts to a speeding ticket. What is he worth now, 30+ billion?
You absolutely miss the point, it's not about money. By doing your suggestion, he wouldn't be the billionaire he is. Giving up means closing the door to something completely. He didn't give up and fights for his belief, as many pioneers had to do in so many documented cases for centuries. If you give up, you only fail and never succeed.
 
#23 ·
Quote:
Originally Posted by starliner View Post

Am I the only one wondering when Zeni Max became a "VR rival"?
confused.gif
Nope, you aren't.

Zenimax had the funds, the expertise (e.g. Carmack), and plenty of opportunities to invest and develop VR, but didn't.

However, now there is easy(ish) money to be made...
 
#25 ·
Quote:
Originally Posted by CoD511 View Post

He didn't give up and fights for his belief, as many pioneers had to do in so many documented cases for centuries. If you give up, you only fail and never succeed.
Pioneer? He is no pioneer. All pioneers are usurped by latter entries into said industry.
 
#26 ·
What a fun world we live in when two business titans are fighting over who owns what comes out of John Carmack's brain. This is what you get for the pursuit of making great things, stuck in between a cry baby and a money grubber.

Now Now, I understand how business works. I have (had) my CPA license and my 150 credits in accounting and business law. I know the issue here. I'm simply stepping back and looking at it from a sane perspective. All these companies are doing is successfully stalling innovation because they are quite literally scum. One of our employees had an original, individual thought, we own him and therefore have intellectual property rights to anything he does! This has been going on for many decades now.
 
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top