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/

69,106 views 281 replies
Reply #76 Top
TGT Soft are IDIOTS. Jealousy man jealousy. They know Stardock has the better product and they're just trying to make their product look better by adding the IP button. Why in the hell can't they just make their own icon changing program? WHY, because they're hackers, not programmers. >
Reply #77 Top


thanks Jafo and paxx.

The more I here about the case the more I think its is a 'cased close' in favor of Stardock.


I'll look in the morning (or sometime there after) about cases that are similar to this. From memory there are plenty.



I am at a loss as to why they went forward with the suit. I get suing Brad (because all other ways would definitely not work) but suing 'everything that moves' seems quite ridiculous.



Personally I would counter-sue based on tort civil law and quite possibly criminal law as well.



It funny that they brought suit in Louisiana instead of Michigan (Stardock's home state).

Stardock could have just ignored it as long as they don't have any way of proving that Stardock has residency (forgot the actual term word for this) in Louisiana.

But I guess they can't ignore this challenge (mostly because TGSoft would just use it anyway)



Counter-Sue Brad... and I wouldn't talk about it any more either.
Reply #78 Top
The way that this country gets caught up in useless lawsuits is ridiculous. It amounts to Adult temper tantrums... GROW UP TGT Soft!

I am curious though if StyleXP applied it themes in a legal manner what would be said about them? Not that it matters much since I still think its wrong to sue just because you don't get your way.

It was interesting to read on neowin though how many have a hatred of Stardock or think they charge too much. Gee I think charging $20 for a program that uses a hacked file is a rip-off. I don't think that just because I enjoy Stardocks programs. Its called more bang for the buck, not to mention an honest buck.



Powered by SkinBrowser!
Reply #79 Top
ok... what is going on with their site?

http://www.tgsoft.com/

???
Reply #80 Top
Joe.....tgtsoft....
Reply #82 Top
Jafo beat me to it!
Reply #83 Top
  • Hardware interfaces
  • Reverse Engineering
  • Install and help systems
  • Integration with existing code & systems
  • Debugging and trouble shooting
  • Memory leak detection
  • Re-writing & re-architecting existing products
  • [From the TGTSoft site]

    Gee...all that sounds ever so groovy, but how about 'With permission, naturally'?...

    'Re-architecting existing products'.....just try that in MY Profession with my product and I'd have their balls, collectively and individually....

     

    Reply #84 Top
    Well here is my 2 cents:

    Tis pisses me off. I have just uninstalled SytleXP and anything related to StyleXP from my computer. I like what it does but I like WB and Stardock more.

    Brad sue them back and give Microsoft a call. Use the money you win to get 3 more servers.
    Reply #85 Top
    Hell even their logo is a freaking RIP of the NetObjects Fusion MX and up logo !!!!




    what a lame business...
    Reply #86 Top

    Actually, they do have IconTranslate for download on their web site. Except it's a command prompt program and I can't figure out how to use it. I was curious to see what exactly it did... Well, not muc, from my experience.

    Oh, and get a laugh out of this.  Upon installing IconTranslate, you must agree to the EULA. And one paragraph of it goes like this:

    This software is owned by TGT Soft Corporation and is protected by national copyright laws and international copyright treaties. 
     
    GRANT OF LICENSE AND PROHIBITIONS.  This software is licensed to you.  You are not obtaining title to the software or any copyrights.  You may not sublicense, rent, lease, convey, modify, translate, convert to another programming language, decompile, or disassemble the software for any purpose.  Permission must be obtained before mirroring or redistributing the evaluation copies of the software.

    Now, isn't that funny?

    Reply #87 Top
    Reply #88 Top

    They've gotta be careful....an EULA declaring 'ownership' may become an admission of theft if it's determined that the rights are not theirs to claim.

    My issue with a builder claiming copyright was exactly this....he had not previously requested my consent to 'translate, convert....' so had no legitimate claims to the subsequent product.  I really took the wind out of their sails....

    Reply #89 Top

    From the top of .iptheme files (such as ChristmasTime -- IconPackager adds this when it generates .iptheme files)

    ;This theme was created for use specifically by IconPackager
    ;or explicitly authorized by Stardock to use IconPackager themes.
    ;
    ;This theme may not be converted, imported, or read by any program
    ;without the explicit written consent of Stardock Corporation.
    ;
    ;The theme itself is owned by the copyright holder (the theme author)
    ;and use of his or her's intellectual property materials is expressly
    ;forbidden without the consent of the theme author.
    ;
    ;When in doubt, contact [email protected].

    Reply #90 Top

    In good old Aussie colloquial lingo....that clause para 2 of #89 means they're knackered...

    Reply #91 Top
    make em squeel like a piggy.
    Reply #92 Top
    Well I do have to start off and say that the lawsuit that they're trying to pull isn't right. If they can come up with their own icon format, good for them. Personally I don't think that there is much anything wrong with the idea of the StyleXP program. I used to use it about a year ago until the 30 day trial ran out. Still, I think more and more people are finding out that you can just download the hacked uxtheme.dll file off the internet for free and patch it yourself and apply your msstyle skins with the display properties instead of using their hard drive-space-wasting program. That's what I did. (Get it from http://www.lightstar1.com/install.htm. Just follow the instructions.) Then I just use IconPackager for icons. So on top of that I basically use WB skins and msstyles. I figure that it gives me a bigger variety.
    Reply #93 Top
    What a crock of baloney. This is truly mind-boggling, especially since there's basically no chance that TGT Soft can possibly win this lawsuit. Hopefully it won't get very far before some astute judge stops laughing long enough to throw it out of court.

    And when that happens, Brad, definitely sue TGT Soft to cover your legal bills. They started it, they can finish it.
    Reply #94 Top
    Hmm, how can they sue you? You don't own Stardock or Wincustomize do you? You are just a employee correct?
    It would seem to be the same as someone who sues me when I work for a company and I'm not the owner. It sounds like you have a easy reason to file a Motion To Dismiss.

    If they want to start trying to sue Stardock, then I think Stardock should file a counter suit, since it created Iconpackager and TGT is modifying it without consent, and making profit without consent.

    I think that TGT is just jealous of the success of Stardock and TGT is probably losing all their sales. They are probably going bankrupt and looking for a scapegoat. I surely hope that Stardock files a counter-suit and shuts them down.
    Reply #95 Top
    #91 by Crazy Travis and ½ - 12/20/2003 1:08:27 AM
    make em squeel like a piggy.


    Really, that is quite unseemly! And this, a family site too!

    But frankly, I agree.



    Powered by SkinBrowser!
    Reply #97 Top
    I can hear those banjos playin
    up in the hills so high
    listen to the jugger blowin
    a tune to make me cry

    Now Frogboy deserves more respect
    then those frog legs I ate last night
    Lets whip em good boys, and shout respect
    and show em how to fight
    Reply #98 Top
    What a petty, spiteful, vindictive, underhanded, money grubbing, sore losin', bunch 'o' maggots they must be over there!
    This stinks worse than a dead animal on a hot sunny day. >

    Certainly hope all turns out well for Brad/Stardock. >

    Dont get pissed often.... but I'm pissed now! >



    Powered by SkinBrowser!
    Reply #100 Top
    Brad, these guys are obviously WRONG, you should be the one to sue someone!! >