<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?>
<rss xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom" version="2.0"><channel><title>Disqus - Latest Comments for JasPurewal</title><link>http://disqus.com/by/JasPurewal/</link><description></description><atom:link href="http://disqus.com/JasPurewal/comments.rss" rel="self"></atom:link><language>en</language><lastBuildDate>Mon, 28 Sep 2009 07:01:59 -0000</lastBuildDate><item><title>Re: Why suing your rivals makes good business sense</title><link>http://www.gamesbrief.com/2009/09/why-suing-your-rivals-makes-good-business-sense/#comment-17709631</link><description>&lt;p&gt;Fair point - VCs might just run away at the sight of a lawsuit.  But, if lawsuits are so common between games companies of this nature, presumably the canny ones would take a more enlightened approach and only worry about those claims which stand reasonable prospects of causing damage to the prospective fundee company - i.e. claims which may end up shutting down the game or at least reducing its gaming population.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Jas&lt;/p&gt;</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">JasPurewal</dc:creator><pubDate>Mon, 28 Sep 2009 07:01:59 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: Why suing your rivals makes good business sense</title><link>http://www.gamesbrief.com/2009/09/why-suing-your-rivals-makes-good-business-sense/#comment-17383115</link><description>&lt;p&gt;Hi there Nicholas - a really very interesting article, which gives a gamer/lawyer like me much food for thought.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;A few observations spring to mind (in no particular order):&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;(i) While litigation is of course an important strategic weapon in the right circumstances, it is worth bearing in mind that it can also be a double-edged sword: you have to have grounds for the claims you make otherwise, sooner or later, you are going either to get smacked down by the Court or you will come up against someone who won't settle and is willing to take the battle all the way to Court.  Which most companies definitely do not want even if they a have strong case (see (ii) below...)&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;(ii) Litigation has other risks as well.  In particular, the real problems tend to be negative publicity and disclosure of uncomfortable/commercially sensitive information (either of which could be a killer for social gaming businesses which depend upon their gamers' goodwill towards them, as well as third party funding).&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;(iii) While I don't disagree with you that targeting other gaming companies' VC funding may be one of the objectives of this kind of litigation, I would have thought a more obvious objective would be that litigation can help to to shut down rival games so that their customer base becomes your customer base, which = £££.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Best,&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Jas&lt;/p&gt;</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">JasPurewal</dc:creator><pubDate>Fri, 25 Sep 2009 12:27:25 -0000</pubDate></item></channel></rss>