Typically, conduct would have to rise to the level of fraud to justify punitives in a contract based dispute. That’s a very high hurdle in most jurisdictions. Also, at that point the conduct complained of would likely be based in tort, not contract.
You can’t typically get punitive damages for contract disputes. Also, there is a very real possibility that the contract hasn’t been breached by the new owners’ actions. It sounds like they used their superior bargaining power to put a lot of questionable yet enforceable provisions in the contract.
There are a hundred different reasons to start a company other than to make profit. Don’t be fooled by the lies of market capitalism. Some people want to create a legacy that generates income for themselves and their employees, maybe even their children. Not everyone is looking to sell to the highest bidder. With that said, the bigger the company, especially if they plan to go, or already are, publicly traded, or are owned by private equity firms whose sole focus is profit and value of the entity the more likely the assumption is true.
I understand their reasoning… My point is why patent a locomotion style when no one gives a shit if the game is shit. I don’t think a great looking walking animation is going to move the needle as to a game’s sales.
Beat it Monday night. Immediately started ng+. I’m a slow learner, and I’m just now dialed in with the flow of combat, which is good, because ng+ is no joke.