• Hey Guest. Check out your NeoGAF Wrapped 2025 results here!

Security guards sent to Infinity Ward. West and Zampella fired for "insubordination"

poppabk said:
Yeah going back to 2003/2004 to complain about Activision purchasing IW seems kinda petty and entirely irrelevant to the lawsuit.


well...I don't know about that. I'm not a lawyer and my legal kung fu is non-existant so I'm not sure if that info is relevant or not but the whole thing just seems unusual.
 
TheOMan said:
Weird - you'd think they'd be *sitting* on said documents already, no?

This is back-up in case they do find something to bring against W&Z. If they don't, no problem - pay a settlement of maybe $100 million and get control of CoD completely to do with as Activision pleases. If they find something, then hey, they're not out the settlement money.
 
Vinci said:
This is back-up in case they do find something to bring against W&Z. If they don't, no problem - pay a settlement of maybe $100 million and get control of CoD completely to do with as Activision pleases. If they find something, then hey, they're not out the settlement money.

Why would W and Z settle? If ATVI fired them for what they said they did...shouldn't they already have the "proof" at their fingertips? Seems odd to me.
 
TheOMan said:
Why would W and Z settle? If ATVI fired them for what they said they did...shouldn't they already have the "proof" at their fingertips? Seems odd to me.

They'll settle because Activision actually might have something to use against them that would hurt their chances of finding future employment or... truthfully... just for a large shitload of money.
 
Someone is going to fly a plane into Activision one of these days I'm calling it. Then they'll try and sue MS for making flight simulator.
 
Vinci said:
They'll settle because Activision actually might have something to use against them that would hurt their chances of finding future employment or... truthfully... just for a large shitload of money.

Yes - I suppose that is possible. Again though, if they're looking for "backup" to their claims, it seems to imply they fired them rather hastily. Just seems off to me. I guess their ulterior motive was as you say to get control of CoD. Even still, you'd think they'd have their ducks all lined up before executing such a plan.
 
We can only hope that whole bunch of discovery docs get leaked somehow in the next few months. I can't wait to see a Bobby Kotick deposition show up on Kotaku.
 
robjoh said:
The funny thing is if this is somewhat correct and they actualy win the rights for call of duty back from activision, then Activision only has Blizzard to keep them a flout.

They have run every brand they have to the ground.

They are asking for the modern warfare rights, not cod
 
kiun said:
They are asking for the modern warfare rights, not cod
Plus I think they are looking for control of the modern warfare franchise not the rights to the IP. So at most they would be able to stop Activision from releasing MW3, not release MW3 themselves.
 
The amount of stress that the workers at Infinity Ward faced when the company sent guards to there office is unjust. Protect your jobs and follow suit. Activision used scare tactics on it's own workers.
 
i wonder how much of wempella's case will hinge on the testimony of their peers.

wempella's position is unenviable, but atleast it's charged with do-or-die righteous fury and they've got their reputations to fall back on. it's the guys a few rungs down who are really caught between the devil's hot red cock and the deep blue sea. existing in a limbo of perpetual job insecurity, subservient obedience and survivor's guilt as they joylessly factory line new downloadable content.

i wonder if acti have shipped them their complimentary "i am a bitch" coffee mugs yet.
 
" Activision remains committed to the Call of Duty franchise, which it owns, and will continue to produce exciting and innovative games for its millions of fans."

considering gh and tony hawk, this is a fucking lie.
 
Piece of advice for all you guys that haven't entered the corporate world yet; When an employer says to you, "Speaking with your attorney will only make us more enraged!" that's a sign that you should immediately contact your attorney.
 
-COOLIO- said:
considering gh and tony hawk, this is a fucking lie.
I always wonder whether the person writing something like that actually believes it, or smirks to themselves. Or maybe they lean over to the person sitting beside them and reads it out loud as a joke.
 
Why is Activision bringing EA into this? I'm not sure what went down between the IW heads and EA, but is Activision looking to use past instances of insubordination to build a case, or are they looking for the sharing intellectual property with a competitor? If the later, would that be recent sharing?

edit: Oh crap, there is a whole other thread. Maybe my answer is in there

wud said:
deserve it after modern warfare 2 :lol
Wow. It's sad you think that's true and funny.
 
Oh man, Activision's Corporate Lawyers are going to remind me of The Simpsons Monty Burn's legal team.
 
what's crazy is I dunno who said it but some analyst predicted at least a yr ago that IW/Activision will have a full blown beef in their future.
 
YoungHav said:
what's crazy is I dunno who said it but some analyst predicted at least a yr ago that IW/Activision will have a full blown beef in their future.
I'm going to take a shot in the dark: Michael Pachter? He's the only guy I really hear about that likes to predict and analyze things
 
Fun Fact: Activision is actually the first third party gaming company. It was created when Warner took over Atari, and the employee's game creating enviorment was changed so much that making games sucked.

At least thats how I remember it.

My how things have changed. :lol
 
Top Bottom