Legal issues over depicting World War Two equipment

[Former_Older]

Originally Posted by Rama

Former_Older
You don't know more than anybody else here the details of the letter Ubisoft received from NGC lawyers, neither the content of the agreement between NGC, Ubisoft and Oleg.
Nobody except the 3 parties do know, and they wont tell anything since they agreed to keep it confidential.
So you can't say "it's Ubisoft fault", as nobody can say "it's NGC fault" or "it's Oleg's fault"...
Everything said on these forums is nothing but unfounded guess and as usefull as to talk about sex angels.
Wouldn't it be better not to talk about?

Your first statement:

"You don't know more than anybody else here the details of the letter Ubisoft received from NGC lawyers, neither the content of the agreement between NGC, Ubisoft and Oleg."

does not support your second statement:

"So you can't say "it's Ubisoft fault", as nobody can say "it's NGC fault" or "it's Oleg's fault"...
Everything said on these forums is nothing but unfounded guess and as usefull as to talk about sex angels."

I'm sorry, but yes I can know whose fault it is. 1C:Maddox Games did not do the box art. UbiSoft did. They were the publisher. As tater points out, this "opened the door"

So while I know nothing about the finite and precise details of the legal case, I do know it was Ubi's fault.

But tell me more about these angels