Lol. I have no clue why you're so butthurt, there is absolutely no reason for it. The trademark for the logo was abandoned because they have a new logo. According to this [url=http://www.trademarkia.com/bungie-aerospace-85639522.html]trademark[/url] they haven't abandoned anything. And about the "theft": When you call that a theft then almost every third-person-shooter after Gears of War and almost every FPS after CoD 4 is also a theft. BTW: It [url=http://www.bungie.net/7_Bungie-Aerospace-game-reveal-soon/en-us/Forum/Post?id=60354445]could be[/url] that Bungie is going to announce the next Areospace game soon.

mfw

Did you bother reading your entire first source? Because the developer admitted that it was only published by Bungie, and Hairbrain had made a board game which Crimson was a sequel to. The guy is only really upset about the release date, and maybe the few components that got borrowed and changed slightly.

[quote]Because the developer admitted that it was only published by Bungie[/quote]lol ... so in [u]your world[/u] companies can just make themselves a "publisher" sign, take all the cash & glory, and be shielded from all liability? Ever heard of [url=http://www.irmi.com/online/insurance-glossary/terms/p/publishers-liability.aspx]publishers liability insurance[/url] - liked this one as the it talks of covering the "[i]publisher arising from acts such as plagiarism[/i]" in the opening paragraph, so you wont have to read far. As for "few components that got borrowed and changed slightly" - lol, honestly? Do you know how many companies bungie has come at (even when the trademark belongs to Microsoft) ... and funnier still is they claim sit, like [url=http://paletteswapninja.com/2010/04/14/the-death-of-zazzle/]this one from 2010[/url], a shirt with one word "Halo" (and again, who owns Halo?). They sit on the claim until the small guy drowns. Yeah ... can see why bungie finds this type of activity "Fun". Bungie cant even try to claim safe harbor rights, as #1 they made revenue from sales, plus #2 the link to this same article (and a few more) appeared on bungies own crimson forum (thus publisher knowledge). What I found funny though is how you and the claimant both referred to bungie as the [i]publisher[/i]. Lets be honest, Apple pushed the game more than bungie ... even the engines developer publicly spoke of Harebrained works more than bungie did. But always willing to be proved wrong ... include a link from the last 12 months showing how bungie actd in its role of publisher of this game ... for example some PR in a popular magazine, air time ... something that speaks of Harebrained Schemes more than it does bungie.

Second link: Zazzle had their lawyers go after that song. Bungie supported the shirt and liked the song. As it says in the link. As for your argument of plagiarism, everything was done well within the law. Harebrained Schemes was just being a dick, albeit supported by Bungie money, and the SteamBirds developer said that they even made a better game, if that countsfor anything. Yes, Harebrained knew about SteamBirds, but their IP was their own. Now, if you want to supply any more links that you read two sentences of, feel free to do so.

[quote]Second link: Zazzle had their lawyers go after that song. Bungie supported the shirt and liked the song. As it says in the link.[/quote]Guess you didn't check out the in article links? By "[i]bungies support[/i]" are you referring to their lack of replies to trademark word use? Honestly ... read the DETAIL. [quote]As for your argument of plagiarism, everything was done well within the law. Harebrained Schemes was just being a dick, albeit supported by Bungie money[/quote]Again, show you ignorance. "[i]well within the law[/i]", yeah bungie took their cut from the price (so much for "financial resources") and if they do this they are complicit in the plagiarism. And then there is the challenge for [b]YOU[/b] to provide some links of your own. (why should everyone else provide the links you yourself demand ... dont be lazy) Noticed you ignored the chance to provide proof of bungie performing eben the basic publisher duty of product promotion ... couldn't find and links to game magazines in the last 12 months ? Yeah, like I said, bungie obviously love the smell of burnt partner/developer.

Confirmation bias. Your argument hinges on Bungie, which you don't seem to like, supporting a move by Hairbrained Schemes that was plagiarism. When offered evidence against this, sometimes from what you cited as evidence for your case, you rejected it. I'm done here. I see now that you hold your own unchanging opinion and I hold mine. There is no point in further discussion, as you only see what you want. Not what is true. By the way, if Bungie supported plagiarism, where is the lawsuit? Even a small company could do that.

I think you have some facts wrong. First of which comes from that blog. Bungie didn't develop Crimson, someone else (Harebrained Schemes, IIRC) did, Bungie helped. Important difference there. Second, the abandoned mark you cite was likely abandoned because Bungie [url=http://halo.bungie.net/projects/aerospace/]decided on a different logo and visual style.[/url] There is at least one other [url=http://tess2.uspto.gov/bin/showfield?f=doc&state=4805:4yz2u1.2.1]live Aerospace-related mark out there, and it even has a 2013 registration date[/url]. Aerospace may or may not be a dead project (likely just on hold, especially since Destiny seems behind schedule, based on the planned 2013 release per the contract obtained by the LA Times, versus Activision's recent statements that Destiny is likely not coming out in 2013), but your evidence is not compelling in the least.

[quote]First of which comes from that blog. Bungie didn't develop Crimson, someone else (Harebrained Schemes, IIRC) did, Bungie helped.[/quote]lol ... so that makes it Ok then ... classic. Perhaps other crimes can apply your logic ... "[i]No judge, I didn't forcibly penetrate the girl, I just helped by holding her down[/i]" ... thats funny. [quote]Important difference there. Second, the abandoned mark you cite was likely abandoned because Bungie decided on a different logo and visual style. There is at least one other live Aerospace-related mark out there, and it even has a 2013 registration date.[/quote]Yes, and if you read the terms one is for the graphic ... you could have checked before posting. Embarrassing? [quote]Aerospace may or may not be a dead project ... but your evidence is not compelling in the least.[/quote]Honestly? Ok, lets play your game of Aerospace being alive. It must then be the [b]biggest failure ever[/b]. [url=http://halo.bungie.net/news/content.aspx?cid=31862]Aerospace was launched June 2011[/url] to publish mobile games, games which appear weekly (and we are talking multi-platform here) ... and yet [b]IN TWO YEARS[/b] bungie has only been able to publish 1 game ?!? That game took [url=http://www.joystiq.com/2011/10/01/crimson-steam-pirates-was-made-in-12-weeks/]12 weeks to develop[/url] - how is it that [b]NO OTHER[/b] Indie Developer has gone with Bungie? - what is it about Bungie that stopped Harebrained returning (yep, many since, [b]NONE [/b]with bungie) - what of bungies promise, or was it just too hard to do two things at once? Honestly ... it would be better just to say they gave up on a bad idea that to say this level of failure lives on ... but if you insist.

Game dev =/= -blam!- but I'm not going to argue the analogy. [quote]Yes, and if you read the terms one is for the graphic ... you could have checked before posting. Embarrassing?[/quote]Right . . . the abandoned mark is for a graphic which they aren't even using. That was my point. [quote]Ok, lets play your game of Aerospace being alive. It must then be the biggest failure ever.[/quote]Or, as I suggested and you seem to have ignored, it's simply had a slow start and is now on hold due to Destiny being in development and seemingly behind schedule.