New efforts!

[LaughingAlex]

I know the odds are low but, what if it turns out they already had the IP/game/both and were waiting for this years anniversary to announce anything?

[Angel Phoenix77]

I know the odds are low but, what if it turns out they already had the IP/game/both and were waiting for this years anniversary to announce anything?

now that would be cool :)
I respect Tony  for everything he has done this community and keeping things real, however, as he stated he is not on the buyers team and to me that means a few things, such as things have gotten quite with regards to chatting back and forth. Two, due to what happened to NcSoft last year they might not be in the mood to talk to the team.
For me to believe that this attempt failed I would need to heard it from Nate or anyone else on the team.

[Solitaire]

If Nate could respond I am sure he would and if the NDA is why he can not then so be it

We wait

Nate hasn't been on these forums since 17 August 2015, wouldn't know why but my guess is that if under an NDA the best way not to break it, is to not tempt yourself to break it...

There is always a chance the game will return one day and when/if it does I'll be there to celebrate the return of an old friend.

[slickriptide]

WHY has NcSoft consistently turned down every offer to buy something that is totally worthless to them?  They don't want it.  They don't want to make money on it.  They don't want to sell it and make money off of it.  They don't appear to have any interest in resurrecting it themselves, so why play "dog in a manger"? 

I currently pay over a hundred dollars a month for a storage unit filled with a ton of crap that my wife's parents did not take with them when they sold their home and down-sized. We've had the unit for years and have certainly paid more than anything in it is worth. Despite this, my wife has no interest in either selling any of it or even going through it to see what's in it.

Sometimes there's just no reason that looks rational to an outside viewer.

As to your suggestion that NCSoft doesn't want CoH and that it holds no value to them, I'd say that their unwillingness to unload it is direct evidence against both statements.

CoH was profitable when it was shut down. Probably not hugely so, but it was supporting itself. For it to be shut down despite that, there had to be some value proposition where it was more valuable dead than alive. If so, then it still holds some of that value, whatever it is.

Additionally, the IP still has value. The film rights were optioned and presumably still in effect. Licensed games, novels, and comic books exist, and of course there are these annoyung Americans who keep trying to buy something that isn't for sale and, in the process, establishing that the thing they want to buy has a certain value to the potential buyers.

The statement "NCSoft has no wish to maintain a City of Heroes game service" is not at all equivalent to "NCSoft diesn't want the game."

Speaking of buying things that aren't for sale... I'll close with a story - My son went to college and left his Impala at home because it was mechanically deficient. It sat in my driveway for over a year and a couple of local kids, brothers, inquired about it a couple of times.

I had never advertised the car for sale. They were stopping by on their own initiative and making offers. The fourth time, I went ahead and showed them the car, gave them an honest appraisal of its condition, and quoted a fair price that I knrw would satisfy my son.

Their father was a mechanic; hence their interest in repairing older cars. They asked to let him inspect the car. I agreed readily. They were neighbors; I wasn't out to screw them over.

That made it doubly offensive when the father came over and proceded to treat me like I was some sort of car dealer. He found every possible reason to criticize the condition of the car and then used those criticisms and some borderline untruths about the going price of that make and model on Craig's List to make me a lowball offer of a couple of hundred bucks.

Mind you, that this was a car that would sell for $500 or so as a rusted out frame in a junkyard where this was a decent body and interior that needed engine work.

More importantly to me, though, was that the car was not actually for sale. These people had come to my door, asking to buy something that belonged to me, that had neither interest nor benefit from selling.

Then, this stranger who is trying to get this favor from me turns around and treats me like I'm a the one trying to push something on to him and he insults me with his attempts to bargain about something I never asked to engage in bargaining?

To this day, I think those two boys are still puzzled why I simply said, "No thank you, have a nice day" and left them and their father standing in my driveway looking dumbfounded.

The point of this lengthy digression is that while you can say, "Why won't they sell? It clearly has no value to NCSoft", NCSoft is asking, "Why do these people keep bothering us to sell something that is ours and that we have never put a "for sale" sign onto?"

Just because you and I cannot see the value, tbat dors not mean that it lacks value. At the very least is something they own and anything they own is something to hold onto, regardless if the rationality of doung so.

.

[worldweary]

I'm taking TonyV's post as confirmation letting us know that talk's failed.All signed up for the Wake me up when there's news thread but I still think CoH will return one day.

[darkgob]

I'm taking TonyV's post as confirmation letting us know that talk's failed.

You shouldn't, by his own admission he's speculating.  He has better insight into the situation than anyone else not involved with the negotiations, but you can have the best information and still be wrong.

[Baaleos]

The other aspect to remember is that by not selling the CoH franchise, NCSoft therefore prevent competitors from making money of their brand.
Even if NCSoft intend to never use the CoH brand, they are currently given certain protections under copyright and trademark law - which prevents others from profiting from their creation.
A sale of Intellectual Property Rights, would effectively be like NCSoft saying - go on then, take our brand and make money of it, if you can.
NCSoft has the ability to

1. Stop the deal dead
2. Allow the deal to go ahead with conditions (allow a third party to use the brand, but NCSoft retain some sort of rights to the brand)
3. NCSoft sells/transfers 100% of the rights to a 3rd party.

I can't see NCSoft doing number 3 - as that's the equivalent of helping your competitors.

Number 2 - could be along the lines of : We will allow you to use our brand with conditions x,y and z. Which could be anything from credits and branding changes, to the 3rd party devs having to pay a monthly subscription to NCSoft - eg: Rent the brand off NCSoft. (In which case, you can bet that the game would not be F2P - which I am happy with, to a degree)

Number 1 is probably the more likely outcome.
NCSoft make enough money from their other IP, anything the 3rd party devs could scrounge together would be a drop in the ocean compared to their gross worth. Even taking the time to sign NDA's and consult lawyers costs them time, effort and money. Withholding the IP Rights to COH from 3rd party devs, only strengthens their position in the market - so why would they want to give that up, and allow 3rd parties to profit from their own creation.

[Balince]

I think we're due something from Nate. Here we are still checking this thread all the time waiting for something. If it's failed I would hope Nate would say so. I'm assuming the talks are still ongoing but we do deserve to hear something, without us even if they brought the game back it wouldn't be worth it. Tell us loyal CoH fans what's going on to any degree possible so we don't feel like we're wasting our hopes on awaiting it's return.

[ivanhedgehog]

I think we're due something from Nate. Here we are still checking this thread all the time waiting for something. If it's failed I would hope Nate would say so. I'm assuming the talks are still ongoing but we do deserve to hear something, without us even if they brought the game back it wouldn't be worth it. Tell us loyal CoH fans what's going on to any degree possible so we don't feel like we're wasting our hopes on awaiting it's return.

I dont know, maybe he could tell us if phone calls to korea are just as expensive as they were 2 years ago ;)

[adarict]

See, that gets to my question about how "sneaky" people can be to get around NDAs (not just here, but generally).

The answer to your question depends almost entirely on who the NDA is with, and how much effort they want to put into enforcement.  I have dealt with a number of NDAs that are simply done out of habit.  They are standard boilerplate NDAs, and no one actually NEEDS them.  They are an insurance policy.  If someone breaks the NDA and causes us a problem, then we have an option for recouping something.  Depending on who the NDA is with, and of course what the NDA is for, the company may not really care to enforce strict compliance.  If it is something they feel strongly about though, they could scrutinize every thing they find, and claim it is a breach.  There really is not way to know ahead of time, unless the party you signed the NDA with has a history of going after people for breaching the NDA, but many times you don't hear about those breaches BECAUSE of the NDA.

The short answer is, serious business people will avoid any kind of sneakiness and "nudge nudge wink wink" ways of passing along info that is covered by an NDA.  The repercussions aren't worth it.  Doesn't mean it doesn't happen.  If it didn't, we would never have leaks about new products etc.  Some people don't care about NDAs.  That is why most of the famous leakers tend to stay anonymous.  If their identity is known, they would no longer be part of anything that requires an NDA.

[hurple]

The answer to your question depends almost entirely on who the NDA is with, and how much effort they want to put into enforcement.  I have dealt with a number of NDAs that are simply done out of habit.  They are standard boilerplate NDAs, and no one actually NEEDS them.  They are an insurance policy.  If someone breaks the NDA and causes us a problem, then we have an option for recouping something.  Depending on who the NDA is with, and of course what the NDA is for, the company may not really care to enforce strict compliance.  If it is something they feel strongly about though, they could scrutinize every thing they find, and claim it is a breach.  There really is not way to know ahead of time, unless the party you signed the NDA with has a history of going after people for breaching the NDA, but many times you don't hear about those breaches BECAUSE of the NDA.

The short answer is, serious business people will avoid any kind of sneakiness and "nudge nudge wink wink" ways of passing along info that is covered by an NDA.  The repercussions aren't worth it.  Doesn't mean it doesn't happen.  If it didn't, we would never have leaks about new products etc.  Some people don't care about NDAs.  That is why most of the famous leakers tend to stay anonymous.  If their identity is known, they would no longer be part of anything that requires an NDA.

And there could be a point in the NDA specifically disallowing anybody from publicly stating the results of any negotiations, even if they fail, for a specified period after negotiations end.  And, that period could be years.

[Vee]

This thread would be really good fodder for psychology research. It's like the virtual equivalent of a sensory deprivation tank.

[Baaleos]

And there could be a point in the NDA specifically disallowing anybody from publicly stating the results of any negotiations, even if they fail, for a specified period after negotiations end.  And, that period could be years.

The NDA could also prevent 'private' discussion of the negotiations.

I was involved in a claim with a previous employer, and one of the terms of the settlement was an NDA.
The only person I was allowed to discuss the reason for leaving my job, was my spouse - I think that is because it would be treated under the law as Spousal privilege, which is something that not even a court can compel you to testify about.

The main theme I am trying to drill home here is:
If you tell your sister the outcome of talks regarding the sale of CoH. They can sue you.
If you post on facebook, and share it only with one friend. They can sue you.
If you tell your spouse - you are probably safe, but your spouse would probably be subject to the NDA. (not sure on that)

If you breech the NDA even a little bit, the enforcing party can sue you to the fullest extent of the law totally at their discretion.
Of course they need to prove some sort of damage to reputation or monetary loss - sometimes the law suit can have damages added just to teach you a lesson, but generally the judge/ruling body would have to have an axe to grind to take it out on you like that.

[Surelle]

I think we're due something from Nate. Here we are still checking this thread all the time waiting for something. If it's failed I would hope Nate would say so. I'm assuming the talks are still ongoing but we do deserve to hear something, without us even if they brought the game back it wouldn't be worth it. Tell us loyal CoH fans what's going on to any degree possible so we don't feel like we're wasting our hopes on awaiting it's return.

Well....we're really not due anything, though.  Nobody was even supposed to know about Nate and the financial backers' attempt to lease the IP, and their attempt at getting a backup of the i23 CoH shutdown night server snapshot from NCSoft as well.  However, one person leaked info to another person, and suddenly a guy who runs a CoH Facebook site found out and publicly threatened to expose the deal (and the IDs of the financial backers) himself if Nate didn't do it by X date.  That's the only reason the "mask comes off" thread even started here:  Nate's back was to the wall, and he preferred we hear the story from him rather than a third party.  (And he likely figured he could also control how much was said to a higher degree, if he was the one saying it.)

[Shard]

And there could be a point in the NDA specifically disallowing anybody from publicly stating the results of any negotiations, even if they fail, for a specified period after negotiations end.  And, that period could be years.

I'm going to point out a key thing that has been neglected here.

NCSoft has been under a great deal of internal and external... turmoil... the entire time. This either freezes, or massively shifts the timetable ( accelerate or decelerate ) due to changes in policy, management, stock panic of the week and any number of other variables.   

[adarict]

If you breech the NDA even a little bit, the enforcing party can sue you to the fullest extent of the law totally at their discretion.
Of course they need to prove some sort of damage to reputation or monetary loss - sometimes the law suit can have damages added just to teach you a lesson, but generally the judge/ruling body would have to have an axe to grind to take it out on you like that.

I'm not a lawyer, but I don't believe they actually have to prove any damage.  Violation of the NDA is enough.  Damage might influence what your punishment is, but I don't think legally they need to prove any such damage.  In any case, we agree on the short answer, which is, don't break the NDA even in a "sneaky" way unless you are willing to take the consequences.  :)

[blacksly]

And there could be a point in the NDA specifically disallowing anybody from publicly stating the results of any negotiations, even if they fail, for a specified period after negotiations end.  And, that period could be years.

Most of the people suggesting a way around the NDA are not suggesting anything as ... 'direct'... as publicly stating the results of the negotiations.

[Arcana]

If you breech the NDA even a little bit, the enforcing party can sue you to the fullest extent of the law totally at their discretion.
Of course they need to prove some sort of damage to reputation or monetary loss - sometimes the law suit can have damages added just to teach you a lesson, but generally the judge/ruling body would have to have an axe to grind to take it out on you like that.

NDAs are contracts.  They have enforceable terms.  If you sign an NDA that says if you disclose information explicitly covered by the NDA then you owe the other party a million dollars, then if you disclose that information you owe them a million dollars.  It is as simple as that.  The other party doesn't have to prove that "penalty" is "reasonable" because it is not a legal penalty being enforced by the court.  It is an agreement you agreed to and the court is only holding you to your own word.

You could argue that the contract term was unreasonable, but "unreasonable" in contract law has very specific parameters and the fact you agreed to the contract (presumably) of your own free will and (presumably) you were competent to understand the terms of the agreement you were binding yourself to place the burden of proof on you, and it would normally be a very high one.

There's a difference between suing for damages and suing to have the terms of a contract enforced.  Suing for damages generally presumes there are questions of the reasonable characterization of injury and reasonable remedy for a particular situation.  Suing to enforce a contract is completely different.  In fact, if you violate the terms of an NDA you could find yourself subject to both: you could find the other party suing to have a court enforce the terms of the contract upon you (which cover disclosures) *AND* also suing you for damages associated with breach of contract.  That would be, both legally and in real world terms, both reasonable and not out of the ordinary.

[worldweary]

Most of the people suggesting a way around the NDA are not suggesting anything as ... 'direct'... as publicly stating the results of the negotiations.

This.TonyV or anyone here could not say it directly but when he says "I think it's safe to assume that the negotiations are over and have failed" I think it's fair to say he would be better informed than anyone else.
I'm still making costumes and builds and I still have hope.

[Brigadine]

And there could be a point in the NDA specifically disallowing anybody from publicly stating the results of any negotiations, even if they fail, for a specified period after negotiations end.  And, that period could be years.

And that is just underhanded and BS. One could argue they only wanted the PR and were NEVER in good faith.