Gta 5 sold to one bilion people, but will not be avaible anymore?

[nelodiavolo]

Growing up as a teen in the 90's Daz Dillinger along with Kurupt and Snoop Dogg defined hip hop for the West Coast. He might not be as mainstream today, but that doesn't mean he can't reject such a low offer for two of his biggest hits. As already mentioned, it is not Daz's job to say Rockstar can't use it. Its common business sense that they can't use it without permission. Daz rejected, Rockstar used it anyway, and now they have to pay. Most likely more than what it would have been if they just negotiated with Daz.

 

Even if they could patch it out, the damage is already done. Although a lofty claim to have the game removed, its just a strategic ploy to get the largest payout possible. A dirty lowdown move? Maybe. But hey Daz was and still is a hustler from Cali-forn-ia.         

[TechSage]

Isn't it one billion in sales? Because 1 billion people buying it would be A Lot of people.

[Guest]

I corrected myself, and i dont know how to change the title of the dam topic, Daz is doing this bcuz of his interests. People COULD hear his songs trough GTA and listen to him, but Daz just wants money, he would take a large game producer as Rockstar to the court just to earn money because he would probably get more than those 4200 dollars rockstar wants to offer him. It is pissy two songs but he got a chance and as he said, he wont let Rockstar escape from the trap they fell in right now.

 

He is making threats but everyone on this forum probs knows that Daz wont be able to shut down the making of GTA 5, if it does happen i will never play gta 4 and san andreas nor buy gta 5 or any rockstars product, and that my dear fellas will nevah happen.

[Torand]

I'm sorry but that's not how the law works. You don't have to tell people they CAN'T use one of your songs. That's why music is copyright protected, so people don't steal your music and come back and say "well you never said we couldn't". They need elicit written documentation that you allowed them to use your music for this game and any other uses you may have.

 

If Rockstar offered him money and he refused it they are in the wrong. He did not agree to allow to have his songs in the game and should not have been added, they have enough lawyers they should have known. This guy is 100% in the right in wanting to take them to court for what they did and demand a settlement.

 

I do believe he is taking this a little to far wanting it taken off the market but he does have a right to protect his IP. The law is on his side. He might not be able to shut down the game but he will most likely get the songs removed from the game and a cash settlement.

 

I don't understand why people are so against anyone wanting to protect what they own just because they are fighting a company you like and a product most of you haven't even played yet. What if a company took your music or your art design and used it for there use and made money off of it? Would you be ok with that or would you take them to court wanting to removed and/or a cash settlement.

 

I agree 100%.

 

But hear me out a second. No I haven't played the game yet, I'm waiting for it to be out on PC first, I'm not a huge follower of the franchise and quite frankly I don't care what title it is, in this case it just happened to be GTA/Rockstar.

 

Yes, Rockstar are in the legal wrong and if pursued further they will have to come to an agreement.

 

Yes music is a subjective art form, appreciated on a definition of the listeners taste (ergo, I'm not a fan, but others maybe). But, on a game as large as this one and an artist being as 'out of the scene' as long as he has been, (yes $4k~ is little for the games revenue) but he stood to gain more publicity from his old tracks and gain more income from older albums/songs, etc... if people were interested.

 

From a moral standpoint, how I see it is that his intention from the get go was to stall and wait to back them into a legal corner, such as now to milk the payment. Legally, yes, he is set, but in MY opinion he is a bit of a d****e for not arranging a higher payment with Rockstar in the first place after being un-happy with the original offer, he never - at a single point - stated (that I can find a quote of) that he DIDN'T want the tracks to be included, it appeared although he was waiting for another offer. I get it Copyright prohibits usage without consent. But, he was referenced and Rockstar never claimed ownership of the music/content and only used it for sideline usage on a toggle able in game feature. (again, not defending Rockstar, just making a passing point, feel free to correct me as I'm probably incorrect. This is solid as a legal argument (against), I'm on a more moral tangent.)

 

If they took my work; art, music, etc.. it depends. If I was not mentioned, credited, etc at all then i'd be annoyed, or if they claimed ownership of the material. Where as if they were open and directed people toward my material then it depends on the outcome, if it boosted popularity and theoretical sales of said theoretical work then I wouldn't mind, but that is all a subjective opinion and may change.

 

Again, I really couldn't give a flying cluck whether it was Rockstar or another game creator. Yes, the larger game dev's shouldn't walk around like they own the place, but equally I think people need to be clear with intentions and make clear and issue for clarification; in which I believe a normal artist would do, this seems just 'off'. I think both parties are to blame to an extent.

 

I make a point that if I make an argument I stand by it, I don't just spew. I try to make a balanced and pointed debate, with a returnable outcome.

[OddlyShapedTree]

Rockstars Lawyers are much stronger than his lawyers, I doubt this will even go anywhere.

[OddlyShapedTree]

Also what a moron, this is amazing publicity for your content and you want to stop it. 

[theABCshop]

You know your career is over when you try to file a lawsuit against a company that is trying to HELP advertise your music.

[Legend932]

His songs are probably shit anyways, what a jackass, he refused to license his songs to them and then wants to sue them for more money.

I guarantee you he did that knowing what would happen, he isn't trying to take on rockstar, I mean they make more money an hour than that nobody will in a year, he wanted publicity, he knew this will blow up in both celeb gossip sites AND gaming sites and outlets.

 

Rockstar know better, they shouldn't have used his songs, it's not like we're short on rap and hip hop, I mean why even risk a massive headache? Over what? A few shitty songs from a no-name ''artist''? And I use the word ''artist'' very loosely here. Now he got what he wanted, publicity and exposure, who is this guy?  A nobody, that's who, and I hope he stays that way.

 

So to summarize: Daz guy, jackass.

Rockstar: Not 100% innocent. They should have seen it coming.

Oh and that about destroying all unsold copies? Not going to happen.

 

still waiting for that gta5 pc version, it will come... eventually

[Hazy125]

I believe it's 1 Billion in sales not profit.

I think they spent under 300 million in the development, that's still 700 million profit

[TechSage]

LOL, i don't think there are 1 billion console

pursachers

 

Anyway, how many people download songs without their permission? Then they focus on this?

There's always that ONE asshole. Just like the guy who claimed he own the "My Cart" .... but Newegg stopped that almost immediately 

[8521546]

meh, doubth it`s true but if it is... meh, was never really exited for GTA V on pc anyways I dont really like the gameplay and the onsole release have sorta made me feel disgusted about the game because it loooks just sooo awfull