Hacker News new | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit
The developer or publisher would bring the case. Valve would fund it.
It does not work that way. This is not the same when Thiel was financing the anti-Gawker lawsuit.

This has no direct precedents and the case and the lawyers involved need to be chosen carefully, because once the precedent is set it is used by the courts for ruling subsequent cases. You don't want a sloppy lawyer, and the case has to be bullet proof, the judges known in advance (hence why certain districts are chosen for certain types of cases) and so on.

A case of this sort would bring into question so many non-game related things, more related to recent AI copyright and IP theft, that it would far exceed what Valve would be able to bring forward in terms of an argument anyway. Computer game mechanics and game designs are already on thin ice in terms of copyright.

Valve isn't going to fund this, and it is not how legal works.

loading story #50275039
We're simply imagining different cases. I'm thinking about straightforward copyright violations I've read about recently in the games industry.

Regardless, I don't see why Valve couldn't fund a lawsuit based on a novel legal theory.

loading story #50275038
loading story #50275001