Thanks! It helps to have a lot more background and i haven’t looked too deeply into this.
I was trying to keep my reply simple and directly to the point that they didn’t create their own launcher just because they wanted to.
I didn’t know the first point, now I’m wondering if both sides wanted it dismissed in the U.S. at least. From the article I read it sounded like this was being pushed from Ironmace’s side.
I had mentioned the founder’s involvement before, but only in a different reply on this same post.
On the second point, at least as far as U.S. law is concerned, I’m not so sure that this is such a straightforward case. We’ve already seen in previous cases with video games that it’s okay for games to have the same game rules, mechanics, ideas, and principles. That’s why anyone can create a game like Tetris, Monopoly, or Pokemon (such as Palworld). As long as they don’t copy over assets directly, (sprites/models/verbatim text for the game rules, etc.) it’s ok to create a very similar game or even to be inspired by other games. Mostly this is what I understood after listening to some YouTube attorneys that were discussing this matter for Palworld (Hoeg Law and Attorney Tom).
The difference here is that one of the founders did work for Nexon so it seems that a lot of the work was likely plagiarized (which is not illegal in the U.S. but it is unethical). It would have been interesting to see how this would play out in U.S. courts.
Do you have any idea how the courts in South Korea view cases like this?
On the third point, I had heard how they had recruited other employees, but I hadn’t heard about the founder agreeing to destroy the company info and failing to do so. Do you have a link/source for that?
Thanks for the reply!
Edit: asking for source, not because I’m doubting you, I just want to read up more on it.