Slashdot Mirror


Oculus Accused of Destroying Evidence, Zuckerberg To Testify In $2 Billion Lawsuit (arstechnica.com)

An anonymous reader quotes a report from Ars Technica: ZeniMax Media, the parent company of both Bethesda Softworks and Id Software, says it will prove at trial that John Carmack and others at Oculus stole trade secrets to "misappropriate" virtual reality technology that was first developed while Carmack was working at Id Software. What's more, ZeniMax is now accusing Oculus of "intentional destruction of evidence to cover up their wrongdoing." Mark Zuckerberg, CEO of Oculus parent company Facebook, is scheduled to respond to those accusations in testimony starting tomorrow, according to a report by Business insider. ZeniMax's statement comes after Carmack testified at trial last week, saying the case was "ridiculous and absurd." His testimony echoed Oculus' initial reaction when ZeniMax's accusations first surfaced in 2014. In court filings leading up to the trial, ZeniMax detailed its case that Carmack, while still an employee at Id Software, "designed the specifications and functionality embodied in the Rift SDK and directed its development." Carmack's technology and guidance allegedly "literally transformed" Oculus founder Palmer Luckey's early Rift prototype from a "primitive virtual reality headset" that was "little more than a display panel." Carmack allegedly used "copyrighted computer code, trade secret information, and technical know-how" from his time at ZeniMax after he moved to Oculus as CTO in 2013. As the trial began last week (as reported by a Law360 summary, registration required), Carmack told the court of his development of a virtual reality demo for Doom 3 in 2012 and his search for a VR headset that would be suitable to run it. That's when he says he got in touch with Luckey, leading to the now legendary E3 2012 demo that introduced Oculus to the public. ZeniMax is seeking $2 billion in damage, which matches the value that Facebook paid for Oculus in 2014. The trial is expected to last three weeks.

13 of 136 comments (clear)

  1. This is an interesting case by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Apart from the specific facts of what happened while Carmack was working on VR at Id Software.

    It often happens that an employee starts investigating new technology that may not be directly tied to the company's existing products or plans. Typically, the employee will give demos and talks to management and other company employees, but the managers have a decision to make. It's one thing to allow one employee to go off on his own for six months looking into something which might be a breakthrough. It's another thing to assign a team of engineers, including management, marketing, UX and graphics, test, documentation, sysadmin, etc. and capital resources needed to bring the engineer's ideas to fruition. And all the while, there are corporate politics going on, with the "stock" of managers and engineers rising and falling in the firm. And people leave the company for better pastures.

    If the company signs off on the project and says "Let's go!" then, great, chances are the engineer will hunker down and spend at least the next year or two trying to get the now fledgling project off the ground. But what if management balks, or worse, if they assign a manager who has very different ideas about what to do with the technology, and/or who should be the lead engineer? Certainly, the company has paid for the specs, drawings, prototypes and code that the engineer has developed to date, and properly owns them outright. But do they own what's in the engineer's head? Could HP's lawyers have gone after Stephen Wozniak in the '70s after Apple came out with a hit product?

    1. Re:This is an interesting case by PolygamousRanchKid+ · · Score: 5, Insightful

      But do they own what's in the engineer's head?

      Buried in the small print of my employment contract somewhere, is a clause that states that my employer has the first rights to ANY patent idea that gets hatched out of my bat-shit crazy tiny little mind . . . not just ones that are related to our IT business.

      So, if I came up with a great idea for new toilet paper, I need to at least submit it to our patent boys to take a look. If they like the idea, they patent it in my name, but it gets assigned to my employer. If they don't like it, then I am free to patent it myself . . . provided I pay some legal folks to do the paper work.

      Now if I quit my job, and suddenly the next day submit a patent . . . my former employer will get very suspicious. I am not really sure, but there is probably an exit process that ensures that "everything that happened in Vegas, stays in Vegas." There is also probably some kind of "non-competition" period, in exchange for cash.

      Like the last line of the Pledge of Allegiance to the American Flag . . . "with Freedom and Justice for the Rich." Whoever can afford the best legal team wins the case.

      --
      Schroedinger's Brexit: The UK is both in and out of the EU at the same time!
    2. Re:This is an interesting case by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Just because it is in your employment agreement doesn't mean it is enforceable. It depends on state laws. For example, in California:

      http://law.justia.com/codes/california/2011/lab/division-3/2870-2872/2870

      Any provision in an employment agreement which provides that an employee shall assign, or offer to assign, any of his or her rights in an invention to his or her employer shall not apply to an invention that the employee developed entirely on his or her own time...

    3. Re: This is an interesting case by rahvin112 · · Score: 2

      The way you should look at any court case is what the lawyers aren't talking about. First they aren't talking about copyright, they keep taking about IP, a nebulous term with no legal meaning. They aren't talking about a contract between Zenimax and Carmac that gives them ownership of anything he developed because no such contract exists. And most important of all they are talking about destruction of evidence because they didn't find any evidence in discovery to talk about instead. Usually a destruction of evidence claim proceeds the case being thrown out for lack of evidence.

  2. What? by ChoGGi · · Score: 4, Funny

    None of the entertaining quotes from Carmack?

    One line of questioning asked whether Carmack knew about a âoesecret meetingâ in a hotel room with Oculus co-founders Nate Mitchell and Palmer Luckey, to which Carmack responded âoeNo I didnâ(TM)t, it was a secret.â A MacBook was brought up during questioning as well, with the lawyer asking why it was never wiped, with Carmack responding: âoeI am not a Mac user unless under duress.â

    http://uploadvr.com/john-carma...

    1. Re:What? by ChoGGi · · Score: 2

      Ah right Unicode...

      One line of questioning asked whether Carmack knew about a "secret meeting" in a hotel room with Oculus co-founders Nate Mitchell and Palmer Luckey, to which Carmack responded "No I didn't, it was a secret." A MacBook was brought up during questioning as well, with the lawyer asking why it was never wiped, with Carmack responding: "I am not a Mac user unless under duress."

  3. Going after Carmack? by beheaderaswp · · Score: 2, Interesting

    They better have real evidence. If you filled a 100ft by 100ft room full of the smartest people on earth- Carmack would be in the room. That's big game hunting.

    You don't sue a person like that- you make a deal. Because he doesn't need to win- it was his brain. He already won.

    --
    Another consultant who stuck it out.

    "We are the Priests, of the Temples of Syrinx..."
  4. Re:John Carmack by ckatko · · Score: 2

    >Carmack is also noted for his generous contributions to charities and gaming communities. Some of the recipients of Carmack's charitable contributions include his former high school, promoters of open source software, opponents of software patents, and game enthusiasts. In 1997, he gave away one of his Ferraris (a 328 model) as a prize to Dennis Fong, the winner of the Quake tournament "Red Annihilation".[20]

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...

  5. Re:John Carmack by Teancum · · Score: 5, Interesting

    John Carmack was simultaneously working for Oculus, ID Software, and not mentioned at all here is Armadillo Aerospace where he was even doing NASA contracts all at the same time. Trying to be Buckaroo Bonzai by doing everything at once is more than most normal people could do. It was about the time Zenimax took over ID Software that John Carmack wanted to continue doing this sort of multi-tasking, but they insisted he decide who he was going to work for exclusively.... and he told them to go take a hike.

    If you are an engineering who is moonlighting on multiple side projects, it can definitely get a little bit fuzzy about what stuff you develop on your own time vs. what you develop for your employer. In Carmack's case, the previous management was a whole lot more open to him pretty much doing as much as he wanted to do and however he wanted to do it as long as they got a piece of the action. ID Software got the better end of the bargain in that situation and made a whole bunch of money off of the work that John Carmack was able to perform on their behalf.

    That these asshats tried to kill the goose that laid golden eggs... is what they are pissed about. Even more because that goose flew away rather than them getting to eat goose for dinner and laid some golden eggs for somebody else instead that made billions of dollars for those investors.

  6. Re:John Carmack by arth1 · · Score: 2

    But if Carmack wrote code on a computer owned by id software, powered by electricity paid for by id software, in an office rented by id software, while sitting on a chair paid for by id software, with a salary paid for by id software.... come on, we all know how this works. Guess who owns the code.

    A company with a mailbox in the Eastern District of Texas.

  7. Re:Smoking gun of theft or go home by fibonacci8 · · Score: 2

    Ironically, they turned out to be Hillary Clinton's.

    --
    Inheritance is the sincerest form of nepotism.
  8. Re:Smoking gun of theft or go home by TellarHK · · Score: 3, Interesting

    If he had it in writing, this wouldn't be a lawsuit. Zenimax wouldn't make the very specific claims that they've made now, unless they felt like they had pretty rock solid evidence. When you're dealing with a more "he said, she said" legal tiff, the plaintiffs usually use language that gives the defendant an out. "We believe" or "It appears" or "we suspect" and "may" would show up in the accusations. That way, the defendant has an easier time publicity-wise saying "Whoops, someone goofed. Here's some money."

    In this case, Zenimax is being very, very specific and has been from the start. They say Carmack took files from Zenimax owned systems and that is the *biggest* no-no in the book. It's entirely likely that Zenimax knew he was collaborating with Oculus and was fine with it, but that they didn't want anything Carmack did while working for them to *officially* become Oculus IP. And then, Carmack not only leaves, but if he took things *with* him, that's a pretty severe case of IP theft. Even if none of that code actually got directly used in Oculus products, if it was used as a basis for any component required by Oculus that Carmack had a hand in generating while he was at Zenimax, he's fucked himself.

    The only way for Carmack to have done things cleanly was to have absolutely no possible hint that he would have done what Zenimax is claiming he did so he could claim that he used knowledge in his head but *not* anything produced while working for Zenimax beyond that. And if Zenimax is telling the truth, he fucked up that *one* job.

  9. Re: Smoking gun of theft or go home by TellarHK · · Score: 2

    If there's no single email involving Zenimax IP regarding VR or honestly anything else, he might be okay. But let's be real here. Those emails will be LOADED with stuff he shouldn't have taken with him. Not unless his company email was there only to arrange birthday parties for staff.