Jump to content

Danakar Endeel

Imperium Member
  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

  • Feedback


Danakar Endeel last won the day on June 15

Danakar Endeel had the most liked content!

About Danakar Endeel

  • Rank
  • Birthday 09/01/1975

Profile Information

  • Gender
  • Location
    The Netherlands

Recent Profile Visitors

3,679 profile views
  1. CIG's legal team has responded to CryTek's rambling 'opposition' and it looks like they are wiping the floor with CryTek's new legal team. document: DEFENDANTS ’ REPLY TO CRYTEK GMBH ’ S RESPONSE TO DEFENDANTS ’ MOTION FOR BOND NO SHOWING THAT CRYTEK IS GOOD FOR THE MONEY NO SHOWING THAT CIG’S ESTIMATE IS UNREASONABLE NO SHOWING AGAINST “REASONABLE POSSIBILITY” Opposition Argument on Newly-Deflated Objectives is Inconsistent With Crytek’s Numerous Pleadings Crytek Makes No Showing on the Merits Crytek ignores the two big wins CIG already achieved. Crytek does not even try to back up its Faceware claim. Crytek concedes that it cannot prove the essential element of damages on the Bugsmashers claim. Crytek provides no proof or legal support for its bug fixes claim. Crytek fails to show why it should get credited for Amazon’s code or how Crytek was damaged by the loss of credit. Crytek fails to show how the development of Squadron 42 breached the GLA or was impermissible under the Amazon license agreement. re: Faceware: re: Bugsmashers: re: Amazon: ... TL;DR; In conclusion: Imgur album containing images of all the pages from the pdf
  2. Don't worry about it. I believe the extra ships are part of the Origin Celebration event so you can try them out for a while. At least I recall Jared mentioning that we'd be able to play around with all Origin ships during the event. So if your extra ships are all from Origin they are temporarily available to everyone because of the event.
  3. CryTek filed their 'opposition' to the Motion for Bond ... consisting of 15 pages where these new lawyers are regurgitating the entire case with even more random allegations thrown in (including complaints that were already dismissed by the Judge) which as far as I am aware is not even relevant to a bond hearing as that stuff should have been in a Third Amended Complaint during the pleading stage and we have already moved beyond that stage when CryTek decided not to amend any further back in January. Apparently they also forgot that this was supposed to just be an opposition to the Motion for Bond and only at the end did they apparently remember as the conclusion feels rather tacked on. Effectively they wrote 15 pages of random gibberish while grandstanding with claims that CryTek has no financial issues and is loaded with cash just to ask the Judge to either dismiss the Motion entirely or set it much lower for no reason. If CryTek has no financial issues and are loaded with cash I wonder why they take such issue with this measly $2.2M bond... Hell, this whole 'opposition' felt more like reading one of DS' incoherent blargs. CRYTEK GMBH’SRESPONSE TO DEFENDANTS’ MOTION FOR BOND Also strange to see CryTek claiming that even if CIG is using Lumberyard they would still be bound by CryTek's GLA ... because Lumberyard is CryEngine. It's almost like they now want to claim that Lumberyard is still CryTek's property or something. Not sure if Amazon sees it the same way...
  4. Afaik the bond would only be available for covering CIG's legal fees so if CryTek decided not to pay Skadden they would have to sue CryTek themselves.
  5. No clue as to why CryTek's legal representation suddenly chose to depart. They already tried stalling tactics by asking on an extension for their extension but the Judge put a stop to that after noting that CryTek had done absolutely nothing during the extra time that she had already been given to them. Now it could also be that Skadden finally caught on to CryTek's potential financial issues and didn't want to be left with unpaid legal fees. As such it's possible that Skadden demanded an up-front payment for continuing their representation and CryTek either refused or was unable to comply. This is all just speculation though... Lack of a case was pretty apparent already and Skadden must have known how flimsy it was from the start. Guess Skadden was urging CryTek to engage in settlement talks but Avni Yerli is apparently too arrogant to see reason. After all, if he's resorting to threats in an email to Ortwin Freyermuth this does not strike me as a good tactic and it didn't appear to help matters at all (in fact it made things worse for CryTek). No doubt CryTek will want to try to stall some more with some bullshit excuse (like their new legal counsel needing time to be brought up to speed or something) as this whole $2M bond seems to concern them greatly. I am not sure if the Judge will play along however as so far CryTek has been acting in bad faith while squandering the extra time the Judge already gave them on several occassions. Guess we'll just have to wait and see what (if any) opposition CryTek will file in just a few days (CryTek’s deadline to oppose CIG's Motion for Bond is June 7 2019).
  6. It appears that Skadden is no longer able (or willing) to represent CryTek as their entire legal counsel has filed to withdraw. REQUEST FOR APPROVAL OF SUBSTITUTION OR WITHDRAWAL OF COUNSEL (PROPOSED) ORDER ON REQUEST FOR APPROVAL OF SUBSTITUTION OR WITHDRAWAL OF ATTORNEY CryTek is now being represented by two completely new attorneys; each from a different lawfirm. New attorneys are Ben M. Davidson from Davidson Law Group and Christopher R Schmidt from Erise IP.
  7. Crytek GmbH's Application For An Extension: DENIED Order on Motion for Extension of Time to File It appears that the Judge is really starting to get fed up with CryTek and has DENIED CryTek's attempt at constantly delaying things by asking for further extensions on already extented time. She finds that another extension is unwarranted because, unlike CryTek's claim of wanting to engage in "meaningful settlement talks", both parties apparently aren't even close to reaching any sort of agreement with CryTek now resorting to threats and bully tactics when they have had more than enough time to "brief the Motion". The Judge had some choice words to say about the matter. Not looking good for CryTek if even the Judge is starting to get pissed off with them.
  8. It appears that CIG is opposed against CryTek's constant stalling tactics. Can't say I blame them when even the CEO of CryTek tries to string CIG along for months by pretending to be open to 'meaningful settlement talks' but won't even make a single concrete settlement demand when asked. DEFENDANTS' OPPOSITION TO PLAINTIFF'S EX PARTE APPLICATION TO EXTEND PLAINTIFF'S TIME TO RESPOND DEFENDANTS' MOTION FOR A BOND PURSUANT TO CAL. CIV. P. CODE § 1030 TheMarcusArts over on Reddit found some interesting bits of information within the document. Seems like Yerli still thinks he can act like a bully by making demands and threatening CIG while it appears that CryTek's entire lawsuit was just shooting blanks and is now in shambles.
  9. CryTek wants more time (again): EX PARTE APPLICATION for Extension of Time to File Response To Defendants' Motion for Bond; and Proposed Order filed by plaintiff Crytek GmbH. (Attachments: # 1 Proposed Order) (Pak, James) (Entered: 05/24/2019)
  10. Got me a Ranger CV warbond as it could be ideal to store in smaller ships like the Avenger Titan. Would be nice to have a small ship for quick local missions and then race out on the bike for the final miles to collect mission boxes while your ship is parked away from the objective so I'm not exposing my ship to AA guns or random gankers with ships parked at mission sites.
  11. I fear you're right, and it fits CIG's modus operandi to put restrictions on everything for no reason (Valkyrie comes to mind) so I guess I'll just get a CV as both my NOX and Cyclone-TR have guns but can't carry cargo. It would still suck if you can't even add a motorcycle luggage rack to an otherwise identical model though.
  12. Makes me wonder though if these variants are all locked into their roles or if add-on parts can be exchanged. Like that cargo-rack on the CV sounds like something you should be able to mount onto the other versions as well and I'm wondering if the CV/RC still have weapon hardpoints that simply don't have weapons mounted stock. I'm guessing that they're all going to be locked in their roles though with no swappable parts for no logical reason (as usual with CIG). Still, I would have liked a CV that I could mount guns on or buying a cargo-rack for a TR ingame from a Tumbril dealership or something. So I guess I'll just get a CV as my NOX and Cyclone-TR have guns but can't carry cargo. These Rangers also look much smaller than any of the other speederbikes we currently have and it would be pretty cool to carry one around with me inside my Titan.
  13. This weeks ISC episode has a small section about these new bikes.
  14. Heh, that TR version kinda reminds me of the Batpod from The Dark Knight trilogy.
  • Create New...