Frogboy Frogboy

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

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

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 .

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/

69,373 views 281 replies
Reply #176 Top
yeah. Ignore him. We all love ya China Girl.
Reply #179 Top
eh, China, he knows all about it with it dribbling from his ears...

He's a dink, I mean he should be dinked
Reply #180 Top
I mean he should be dinked


or made a visitor....
Reply #181 Top
Oh, good lord! Chichi is up to her same old bs. Now I know where mfaccone got the poop nose stuff from http://www.themexp.org/forums/viewtopic.php?t=7594&postdays=0&postorder=asc&start=20

ChiChi You are without a doubt the most pathetic senior citizen I have ever had the misfortune to come across! I thank god you are not my grandmother
Reply #182 Top
oops, my bad...was that a personal attack or something?

Reply #183 Top

This is appalling, Chic girl seems to spend a lot of time analyzing fecal matter, what’s more troubling is that she seems to think poop is analogous to fudge, I wonder if she sometimes eats it, or rubs it all over the walls like a toddler.




Reply #185 Top

You never did exile me... but you probably will now, just for expressing my own opinions on another forum.

To be perfectly honest, I'm not really sure who you are.  I was referring more to Dokt and ChiChiGirl.

Reply #186 Top
Forget reality TV shows...this thread is much more entertaining...



Reply #187 Top
ChiChi You are without a doubt the most pathetic senior citizen I have ever had the misfortune to come across! I thank god you are not my grandmother


there's not much to do this time of year when you're cooped up in a trailer.
Reply #188 Top
http://chichigirl46.deviantart.com/journal/1509826/
Reply #189 Top
ChiChi You are without a doubt the most pathetic senior citizen I have ever had the misfortune to come across! I thank god you are not my grandmother


She's a senior citizen? Even my Grandma doesn't act like that.



Powered by SkinBrowser!
Reply #190 Top
#182 by China♥Cat - 12/21/2003 9:43:15 PM oops, my bad...was that a personal attack or something?


...what...all of a sudden that bothers you????



Powered by SkinBrowser!
Reply #191 Top
mmmm... nope
Reply #192 Top
...that's my girl



Powered by SkinBrowser!
Reply #193 Top
jeezers, bunch of loonies run loose from the asylum last night?
I think wincusomize is great unlike those folk.

And I though I was crazy



this thread sure got off topic.
Reply #194 Top
"Takes all types"...


I dunno, it seems to me that it wouldnt hurt to lose a few...
[Message Edited]
Reply #195 Top

OK, guys....but 'ex' members or not, let's remain above the lowest common denominator and refrain from flame, etc.

The reality of the issue is that its history was/is generally by private email and hence won't be aired publicly.

Suffice it to say there are two sides to everything, but rarely do both have merit or substance...

Reply #196 Top
mmm...

I do not believe that draging this over and dumping it on DeviantArt is one of the best things to do, just my opinion and all I know, but...
Reply #197 Top
your right brother. But did you read what that girl wrote about WC at themexp.org?

anyways, back to topic.
Reply #198 Top
I'm loath to remove posts, etc...but let's just remain relatively close to the thread topic and not digress to alternate site postings, spreading the 'issue'....
Reply #199 Top
alright with me

back to topic
Reply #200 Top
I'm loath to remove posts, etc...but let's just remain relatively close to the thread topic and not digress to alternate site postings, spreading the 'issue'....


My link linked to the same page as china's link. Shouldn't you therefore delete her post as well?

hmmmmm