TGT Soft sues Stardock (just in time for the holidays :( )

Friday, December 19, 2003 by Frogboy | Discussion: WinCustomize Talk

Well it looks like the folks at TGT Soft are in the holiday spirit (not!).  On Wednesday Stardock received a lawsuit from TGT Soft that was filed in Louisiana.

 

The lawsuit essentially asks for a declaration that TGT Soft can use Stardock’s IconPackager theme format without liability. 

 

This incident began last month with the first beta of Style XP 2.0 which had a button labeled “Add an Icon Pack” which when pressed opened a dialog in which they could load a .iptheme or .ip file (IconPackager files). We were fairly annoyed that 1) They would try to compete with IconPackager/Object Desktop by using IconPackager files (remember, they sell this thing), 2) That they didn’t even give us credit for our icon packaging format but instead referred to them as “icon packs” as if .ipthemes were some generic term created by the ASCII group or something and 3) They didn’t even create icon packages but rather planned to just exploit the popularity of IconPackager which we’ve worked hard and long on for many years to make popular.

 

We informed them that this was unacceptable and we would defend our rights either technically or legally if necessary. If they want to compete with Object Desktop or IconPackager they would need to come up with their own format that they have to support and promote.  If they want to put out an icon changing program, that’s fine. But to copy our format and use it so that they can undercut the price of our software is unacceptable and we believe, illegal. 

 

In subsequent correspondence, we even offered to license them the use of our format for a modest royalty (remember, this isn’t a freeware program we’re talking about, they’re selling Style XP for $20 a pop). Their response was to reject that and file a lawsuit that seems to be designed to force us to let them use/convert our IconPackager theme format without any compensation. 

 

Apparently they would have it where we would be the ones to provide the software to create and support icon packages (which is where most of the development/marketing costs have come from) and they would just reap the benefits financially. Note that Style XP 2.0 currently does not seem to have the ability to actually create icon packages/sets. Only apply them.

 

They have subsequently come up with their own format (.iconset) but since they can’t actually create .iconset files from their program, they rely on a new program they’ve made, IconTranslate, which seems to exist primarily to convert IconPackager themes to their “.IconSet” format. And once installed turns on a feature in Style XP to read IconPackager themes directly from within their program.

 

Picture this scenario then: Someone buys Style XP instead of IconPackager or Object Desktop costing us income. Then their customers would come to WinCustomize.com to download icon packages to use with their program, costing us more money since we pay for the bandwidth.  We pay the costs, they make the money, and to top it off, they’re suing us, costing us legal expenses.

 

To us, this situation is akin to someone asking a skinner to let them port their skin to a different platform and if the skinner says no then turning around and suing them to try to force the skinner to let them port their skin. Stardock fully intends to defend its intellectual property rights.  The implications if TGT Soft were to win are far reaching not just to Stardock but intellectual property holders everywhere including skin and theme authors.

 

We generally feel that people who create stuff should have a say over how that stuff is used. Stardock worked long and hard to make IconPackager a success. Its popularity is not due to marketing but due to the hard work over a long period of time (ex: making it possible to create and apply icons on Windows 95, Windows 95 + IE4, Windows 98, Windows NT, Windows 2000, Windows XP).  Doing that was not easy as early IconPackager users can attest to. It was very hard to make IconPackager work reliably on the many different versions of Windows, different interactions with the OS and Internet Explorer, etc. But this was part of the effort necessary to make IconPackager successful and why it’s the most popular, by far, icon packaging technology available.  On top of that, Stardock has paid many thousands of dollars over the years to create icon packages to help promote our program and format (such as the recently released Christmas Time IconPackager theme).

 

For someone to simply come along and try to cash in on our hard work without any compensation strikes us as both morally and legally wrong.  But to actually sue us (and they are also suing me personally, not just Stardock and I can say, on a personal note, getting a lawsuit that targets me personally a week before Christmas is pretty crummy) is just incredible.

 

Like I said, we don’t have a problem with them changing icons or making icon sets. What features they add to their program are their business. But to try to profit from our hard work over many years is wrong and to file a lawsuit against us (and me personally) to try to force us to let them use our intellectual property goes beyond words.

 

So that’s where we’re at.  We will defend our rights because the implications it would have on all our software as well as on the community. If people who create things don’t get to have a say on how it’s used, it would likely have a chilling effect on our community – whether you’re a skin author, an icon artist, a theme author, or a software developer.

 

IconPackager’s page is: https://www.stardock.com/products/iconpackager/

First Previous Page 12 of 15 Next Last
kwyjibo
Reply #221 Monday, December 22, 2003 8:52 AM
I'm going to be sick.
eieio
Reply #222 Monday, December 22, 2003 9:27 AM
#220 by Admin Jafo - 12/22/2003 8:40:01 AM


Or breasts!

Sorry for sidetracking the thread.



Powered by SkinBrowser!
Frogboy
Reply #223 Monday, December 22, 2003 12:16 PM

I think Buko22 ignored the fact that I am personally being sued as well.

From a PR point of view, I can definitely see where TGT Soft wouldn't want this to be public knowledge. However, I don't see why we should keep this "quiet". Perhaps people would be less inclined to do despicable things if they knew that their actions would be aired pubilcly.

The reaction to TGT Soft's actions have been pretty universal regardless of what website has reported on it, btw.

eieio
Reply #224 Monday, December 22, 2003 1:02 PM
Has TGT Soft ever said what they plan to do when Longhorn comes out and their patch is no longer good? I would be curious if they have ever addressed that with their customers. Surely they (TGT Soft customers) have to wonder what will happen.



Powered by SkinBrowser!
Anthony R
Reply #225 Monday, December 22, 2003 1:16 PM
This is very interesting stuff; I find it intellectually stimulating to read about the evils that men do in business, thanks for sharing. I think what these guys are doing is so illogical, that it could be nothing other than a “banzai charge.” The lawsuit must be a final retaliatory strike from a dying company who probably blame Stardock for their failure. All of that kindred spirit stuff is BS, these guys are malicious, they are cut throats.

MarkMcQ
Reply #226 Monday, December 22, 2003 1:41 PM

#224 by Skinner pictoratus - 12/22/2003 1:02:44 PM
Has TGT Soft ever said what they plan to do when Longhorn comes out and their patch is no longer good? I would be curious if they have ever addressed that with their customers. Surely they (TGT Soft customers) have to wonder what will happen.

They'll have found out long before then. Service Pack 2, from what I gather, will render the hacked dll useless.
Although given the way it's going, Longhorn will be released before it........  

amunchkin
Reply #227 Monday, December 22, 2003 2:01 PM
All I have to say is:

"Good luck and GO STARDOCK, YOU ROX!!!"

I REALLY hope that Stardock and Frogboy wins simply because Wincustomize is the best and so is Stardock and I wouldn't want them to have to go out of business!

S K U .. U .. TGT SOFT!
kongit
Reply #228 Monday, December 22, 2003 2:13 PM
I understand that this is a pile of sh$t. However, I just tried to understand why tgtsoft is doing what it is doing. I fully support stardock and frogboy. I am just tired of reading countless "tgtsoft sucks" posts. We all know they do, lets get beyond that.

And there already is a hacked dll for sp2. I don't know if it works right though.
cosmo-alpha
Reply #229 Monday, December 22, 2003 2:49 PM
Those who can....Do.
Those who cannot....sue.

Pretty(and petty)immature. I'm taking your ball and going home.... >
Apocalypse_67
Reply #230 Monday, December 22, 2003 4:33 PM
In my estimation, Frogboy should not bring Company business to a public forum...


If Stardock or Brad for that matter would have stolen let’s say, TGT’s logo or the layout of their website, then this would be a Company issue and/or business, but we are talking about TGT making a way to use the work of skinners (us) and applying it to their application program via replacement of the file extension. Therefore if the issue or problem involves the work produced by skinners (us) then I do think it’s a public matter and we have the right to know.
If I design an Icon Pack with an .ip extension to be use specifically with the Icon Packager program, what right does TGT have to take my design and replace that extension to be used with another program?
sig101
Reply #231 Monday, December 22, 2003 4:50 PM
Crazy Travis: You'd have to ask TGT Soft why they're doing what they're doing and how they figure it makes sense and is a smart thing to do. On the surface it appears they may have more to lose from such an action than gain. As a preemptive strike against SD taking legal action it would seem ineffective; this doesn't preclude SD from taking action or FB from filing a counter suit. Additionally, since the issue in question is a currently a beta product in development if I understand correctly, an injunction against TGT from distributing the product could be one possibility until the issue is resolved. Given crowded court calendars, if the issue gets to court, the case could take quite a long time, even years.

And when one goes to court the door doesn't just swing one way. The plaintiff doesn't necessarily hold all the cards. There's the discovery process. And it appears that litigation was not the only reasonable option in this case if TGT wanted to use SD's work. Licensing agreements are common between companies. I think usually the plaintiff needs to show harm and goes to court to be made "whole." In this case, a preemptive claim of harm by the plaintiff (at a time when the law does not appear to be on the side of copyright violators) when the suit is an attempt to prevent the defendant and his company from potentially filing suit to be made whole as a result of the plaintiff's current and potential future actions seems a bit wonky.

I would think if they were so sure of their case TGT wouldn't have filed suit at all.
[Message Edited]
HG_Eliminator
Reply #232 Monday, December 22, 2003 5:11 PM
i wonder if they are hopeing that if they can sue frog boy they will get the ability to use his skins and themes without any compensation or his approval.. hence forth opening a door for "legal theft" of any artists skins and images, programs,etc. basically destroying any and all intelectual rites....... no ones works would be safe
Apocalypse_67
Reply #233 Monday, December 22, 2003 5:20 PM
hence forth opening a door for "legal theft" of any artists skins and images, programs,etc. basically destroying any and all intelectual rites....... no ones works would be safe


I guess we all would have to stop skinning
HG_Eliminator
Reply #234 Monday, December 22, 2003 5:21 PM
could be sig ,they filed suit cause they want to block stardock and froggy from sueing them cause tgt plan to use or exploit their work. is kinda like hey if we sue them they cant sue us for the copywrite infringements were going to do .is a pathetic attempt at theft plain and simple.
Jafo
Reply #235 Monday, December 22, 2003 5:24 PM
I think that they simply DIDN'T....
kongit
Reply #236 Monday, December 22, 2003 5:31 PM
If that is the case sig then tgtsoft would be opening a barrel of monkeys that should have been left close. If they create precedence any upstart company could create havoc with a number of other companies that have large roots. I personally think that tgtsoft should never of sued and simply done what stardock asked them to do. However in their ignorance or arrogance they chose a different path. I hope this whole event ruins their name and ruins their business.
HG_Eliminator
Reply #237 Monday, December 22, 2003 6:00 PM
tgtsoft is the company that started the 3rd party visual styles craze with the first software and tools. Still the best, tgtsoft software was featured on TechTV, Windows XP, the Official Magazine, Chip, and the book Microsoft Windows XP Power Toolkit. Style XP works in 11 languages


i got this from their own web site yet i could find nothing that stated when the company was formed. funny part is ive never even heard of the company til it was brought up here. maybe they contend that since (Acording to them) they started the whole skining thing, they should get to use any and all skinning progs and skins without permission or compensateing the authors...that would be like ford trying to sue auto paint manufacturers stateing they get a free supply of paint ...
dumb and dumber must be running the show there .....
sig101
Reply #238 Monday, December 22, 2003 6:40 PM
Well HG, the suit as described here would appear to be a strike against copyright or what constitutes protected works/products and the ability of copyright holders to hold others legally accountable for violations and infringements. So it's not just about FB, the issue is larger than that. Or could be.

And of course it does appear that TGT is suing as a preemptive strike against FB and SD suing them. But unless the law is quite different in Louisiana FB can file a counter suit to their suit for starters. Again, if TGT were so sure of their legal standing and that what they were doing was not copyright infringement, why sue at all? The plaintiff has the burden of proof, so to speak, so in this case it would seem to me they would have to show cause why FB's and SD's legal rights and recourse to the courts should be taken away from them. Perhaps TGT may think they have a better chance of making their case in this fashion rather than as a defendant in a copyright infringement suit, but it sounds a dubious hill to climb to me. Without seeing the actual causes of action for the suit, it's hard to tell what they're specifically alleging and the grounds for the suit.

It's not unheard of that sometimes lawsuits are filed to intimidate people and make them fold. Although in this case I wouldn't count on that happening. Still, it will be interesting to see what does (or doesn't) transpire.

SD's been around for what, 10 years? WindowBlinds has been skinning Windows since long before there was an XP. And other SD products like IconPackager have been around for some time also. I only heard of TGT Soft when XP came on the scene. That'd be 2001. But WB also was skinning XP in 2001, as I recall. (And WB with OB then could emulate the XP style with the start menu and taskbar on W98 and ME.) So as for StyleXP being the first to skin XP, that's debatable. Was it the first company to make money off a hacked XP .dll? That may well be so.
[Message Edited]
Frogboy
Reply #239 Monday, December 22, 2003 6:49 PM
WindowBlinds pre-exists TGT Soft's offerings by years. IconPackager came out I believe in 1997 or 1998.
HG_Eliminator
Reply #240 Monday, December 22, 2003 7:23 PM
yes i agree this is about much more, its a much larger issue. if tgt wins it will set a precidence of legal theft of intelectual property, and open the door for others to follow. every body that uses a computer to make something, like a program or art will be effected. no ones intelectual property will be safe, includeing TGT's.
they may be their own demise.......

i couldnt imagin theyed win. that would mean every website graphic every prog for pc, every code, would be up for grabs.. and i doubt microsoft wants to share it's goodies for free .......

Please login to comment and/or vote for this skin.

Welcome Guest! Please take the time to register with us.
There are many great features available to you once you register, including:

  • Richer content, access to many features that are disabled for guests like commenting on the forums and downloading skins.
  • Access to a great community, with a massive database of many, many areas of interest.
  • Access to contests & subscription offers like exclusive emails.
  • It's simple, and FREE!



web-wc01