Fantasy Warfare: West, Zampella and Call of Duty

April 6, 2011 -

In theory, former Infinity Ward heads Jason West and Vince Zampella could regain partial control of the Call of Duty franchise. We say in theory because the chances of that ever happening are somewhere between slim and none. But the two counts of fraud that the duo added to its lawsuit against Activision earlier this week also asked the court to rescind the Memorandum of Understanding agreement. If the court were to give them a favorable ruling hypothetically, the duo could co-own Call of Duty and release their own games in the series. It's an interesting scenario to explore, even if it is on par with the plot to Independence Day in terms of likelihood.

Wedbush Securities analyst Michael Pachter - and most anyone with an inkling of common sense say that this will never happen.

Pachter explained to IndustryGamers that the law won’t allow West and Zampella to co-own the brand because there's no legal basis for it.

"West and Zampella have no prayer of obtaining control of the brand," stressed Pachter. "They can claim that they were granted creative control, and there is a reasonable chance that they would prevail, but they lost that control when their employment was terminated. If they can prove their termination was wrongful, they will be entitled to damages, but there is no legal basis to award ownership of the brand to them. They could conceivably change their complaint and seek reinstatement as employees, but I haven't seen any demands from them to make that happen."

"As it happens, they have never claimed that they 'own' the brand; instead, they claim that they were granted creative control over the brand under their employment agreement. These are two completely different things. Their creative control was clearly intended to be in effect only while they were employees, and the day that their employment terminated, their creative control ended (made clear by Bobby's alleged comment that "[i]t's impossible for you guys to get fired"). Since they think that they were wrongfully terminated, they are pursuing a claim for damages, which would be the appropriate remedy."

Image source: Paperback Writer


Comments

Re: Fantasy Warfare: West, Zampella and Call of Duty

I like the pretty picture of the castle.

Re: Fantasy Warfare: West, Zampella and Call of Duty

Assuming they win their case, couldn't they try to get co-ownership of the brand in lieu of monetary compensation? I mean, I figure the CoD brand in the long run would be worth far more than anything they could get as far as damages go.

"Power means nothing without honor and pride."

http://grifsgamereviews.blogspot.com My video game review site.

Re: Fantasy Warfare: West, Zampella and Call of Duty

Which is exactly why they wouldn't get it. Without any real legal claim I do not think the judge would award them a share of the CoD brand; the only way they could get in lieu of monetary compensation is through a settlement with Activision, and Activision would certainly never do so as having an exclusive hold on the brand is bound to be much more worthwhile that whatever they would have to give up to West and Zampella. 

Re: Fantasy Warfare: West, Zampella and Call of Duty

Which is kind of a double-edged sword. Without West and Zampella, CoD isn't going to be worth nearly as much, considering they're the ones who pulled the CoD series out of the oversaturated market that is WWII shooters. If it weren't for them, CoD would have died years ago. And there are some, if not many, who doubt the new dev team they hired for Modern Warfare 3 can make a product as high-quality or as successful as their predecessors. I can guarantee you Black Ops wouldn't have sold half the copies they did if they had named it something other than "Call of Duty".

If Activision were smart, they'd swallow their pride and let them have co-ownership so they can keep milking the CoD brand for years to come.

"Power means nothing without honor and pride."

http://grifsgamereviews.blogspot.com My video game review site.

 
Forgot your password?
Username :
Password :

Shout box

You're not permitted to post shouts.
Matthew Wilsonyes it help a sub section of the poor, but hurt both the middle and upper class. in the end way more people were hurt than helped. also, it hurt most poor people as well.04/16/2014 - 12:13am
SeanBJust goes to show what I have said for years. Your ability to have sex does not qualify you for parenthood.04/15/2014 - 9:21pm
NeenekoSo "worked" vs "failed" really comes down to who you think is more important and deserving04/15/2014 - 7:04pm
NeenekoThough I am also not sure we can say NYC failed. Rent control helped the people it was intended for and is considered a failure by the people it was designed to protect them from.04/15/2014 - 7:04pm
NeenekoIf they change the rules, demand will plummet. Though yeah, rent control probably would not help much in the SF case. I doubt anything will.04/15/2014 - 1:35pm
TheSmokeyOnline gamer accused of murdering son to keep playing - http://cnews.canoe.ca/CNEWS/Crime/2014/04/15/21604921.html04/15/2014 - 11:50am
Matthew Wilsonyup, but curent city rules do not allow for that.04/15/2014 - 11:00am
ZippyDSMleeIf SF dose not start building upwards then they will price people out of the aera.04/15/2014 - 10:59am
Matthew Wilsonthe issue rent control has it reduces supply, and in SF case they already has a supply problem. rent control ofen puts rent below cost, or below profit of selling it. rent control would not fix this issue.04/15/2014 - 10:56am
NeenekoRent control is useful in moderation, NYC took it way to far and tends to be held up as an example of them not working, but in most cases they are more subtle and positive.04/15/2014 - 10:24am
PHX CorpBeating Cancer with Video Games http://mashable.com/2014/04/14/steven-gonzalez-survivor-games/04/15/2014 - 9:21am
Matthew Wilsonwhat are you saying SF should do rent control, that has never worked every time it has been tried. the issue here is a self inflicted supply problem imposed by stupid laws.04/15/2014 - 8:52am
E. Zachary KnightNeeneko, Government created price controls don't work though. They may keep prices down for the current inhabitants, but they are the primary cause of recently vacated residences having astronomical costs. Look at New York City as a prime example.04/15/2014 - 8:50am
NeenekoI think free markets are important, but believe in balance. Too much of any force and things get unstable.04/15/2014 - 7:25am
NeenekoWell, the traditional way of keeping prices down is what they are doing, controls on lease termination and tax code, but it will not be enough in this case.04/15/2014 - 7:24am
Matthew WilsonI said that already04/14/2014 - 4:22pm
E. Zachary KnightMatthew, The could also lower prices by increasing supply. Allow high rise apartment buildings to be built to fulfill demand and prices will drop.04/14/2014 - 3:48pm
Matthew Wilsonthe only way they could keep the price's down, would be to kick out google, apple, amazon, and other tech companies, but that would do a ton of economic damage to SF, but I am a major proponent of free markets04/14/2014 - 2:54pm
NeenekoThe community people are seeking gets destroyed in the process, and the new people are not able to build on themselves. Generally these situations result in local cultural death in a decade or so, and no one wins.04/14/2014 - 2:09pm
NeenekoWell yes, that is the 'free market', but the market is only a small piece of a much larger system. The market does not always do the constructive thing.04/14/2014 - 2:06pm
 

Be Heard - Contact Your Politician