True. But lets say i develop and idea for a widget. To produce this widget on my own, market and fund it would be a monumental task. Well beyond my scope. Im just a widget designer. So i pitch my idea to some companies and i get a bite. Now the distiction im going for was the company funding and destributing said widget has sole rights to do so. I get my money to make the widget and a share of the profits. Now lets say one of my employees can't stand the fact that the wiget box is going to be green instead of blue. He causes such a issue publicly we are now in a breech of contract. No more widget. Nor am i allowed to try and distribute this widget because of the contract. The only thing i can do is try to develope a thingamajig from the patents of the widget. But who is going to fund and market my new product considering my previous breech of contract. Sometimes i dont agree with instructions from my boss. I still do them because its my job. Marty lost sight of that fact. His job was to make music for the video game. Not to throw a fit.

That's generally how it works when you're under contract to produce content for someone else. You don't get to keep that work. The only thing you're entitled to is having your name stamped on it. Marty didn't lose anything. With the exception of likely a great deal of his time composing 8 full suites of music that may or may not ever even see the light of day. It works the same way with writers. A common rumor is that the story in Destiny is so bad because Joe Staten left and "took the story with him". It just doesn't work that way. When you're producing aspects of an intellectual property owned by someone else... you don't get to take it with you when you leave. If Joe Staten had tried to "take the story with him", there would have likely been a large legal battle there as well, because Activision/Bungie, as rightful owners of the intellectual property that is Destiny, would be entitled to that story. Not Staten. Which is ultimately how this turned out. Activision and/or Bungie owned the rights to the music Marty composed for them, but he had copies that they worried he might release for free or whatever else, which would be damaging to them. So instead, they demanded that he turn them over... which he used as leverage to demand that they turn over what they owed him. As for Marty being a competent composer... it's really more than that. It's his name. It's kind of like how Stephen King can write terrible books and they'll still sell, simply because they have his name on them. Marty moved additional sales of soundtracks for Microsoft/Bungie. Will the next composer they hire be able to do that? We'll see. (though in my humble opinion, Marty hasn't composed a single bad piece of music in his entire career... even when he was writing commercial jingles)

[quote]That's a good summary, and very important to actually read the ruling and not rely upon a journalists (or headline editor's) interpretation. The crux of the arbitrator's ruling shows that the employee (O'Donnell) was acting out against Activision in an improper manner (though finding the improper behavior and acts could not be shown to have a direct negative impact on sales). Bungie, at the time, stood up for O'Donnell and filed an "veto" letter to Activision to allow the use of O'Donnell's work in the E3 reveal. After losing that "veto" and O'Donnell's juvenile outburst, Bungie kept O'Donnell, but he wouldn't do his job properly (and became a distraction to all the other people still working on the job). Bungie had to let him go for the good of the game. Bungie got dinged because of the WAY they fired him (likely due to bad advice from their own attorneys--or the failure to consult a competent attorney), not wrong for actually firing him.[/quote] They should have given him a package when they fired him. Bungie made a mistake there. He definitely needed to be fired though. It's unfortunate when people can't adapt to change, in this case Marty just could realize he wasn't the final say anymore. [quote]Further, O'Donnell lost a SIGNIFICANT part of this case. He has NO RIGHTS to his own work, all given to Bungie. As an artist, I can imagine that is a horrible result. For the all the time, effort and love he must have given to this project, he has lost all control of that work. I'm not artist, so I cannot imagine the sense of lose that must be. [/quote] Any work he would have done for Bungie would be owned by Bungie. It was never his directly. Since he was awarded some of his equity in the company back (or at least the choice of it) he does have ownership back. Only because he has gained equity in Bungie back. [quote]]Finally, as proof he did not win the entire case, he was not awarded legal fees. While the arbiter noted that nobody sought legal fees, that is likely due to the "split decision" handed down, where each side one at least one major issue. In these types of cases, both sides usually pay their own fees (my guess is that O'Donnell's fees must be at least $80k to $120k). So, all Bungie really lost here is money and stock. They kept the musical component, and got rid of somebody who didn't want to be around. If O'Donnell is the only competent composer, then Bungie lost a lot. If there are others, Bungie can and likely will move on.[/quote] Nobody is indispensable. It's a fact people learn as they age. It's fun to think it when you are young, but the truth is, there is always someone better or someone who can replace you. If you start acting like a jackass you will be replaced. This is a real life fact all young people need to know, understand and accept.

Ahh the part u read was about a separate suit where o'donnell sued over not being paid for his vacation time, he won attorney fees on that one

Damn I can only read the first few pages I'll try to find where I read it...

This! spoken perfectly fellow guardian.