PDA

View Full Version : Nvidia+Future Mark Joint Statement about Nvidia's "cheat"


ra5555
June 4th, 2003, 04:02
http://www.bjorn3d.com/ubbthreads/showflat.php?Cat=&Board=B3D_News&Number=39115&page=0&view=collapsed&sb=5&o=&fpart=1

Basically, Futuremarks dismiss its claims regarding to "nvidia's" cheat and now they are convinced its a program specific optimization...
AlphaWolf
June 4th, 2003, 04:23
You're a day late and a dollar short:
http://www.emutalk.net/showthread.php?s=&threadid=14333
ra5555
June 4th, 2003, 04:34
Originally posted by AlphaWolf
You're a day late and a dollar short:
http://www.emutalk.net/showthread.php?s=&threadid=14333

opps, sorry wolf, :D I didn't know you posted before me. Anyway what are your guys' opinions?

I think Nvidia probably paid some big bucks to get off this one. How ironic is it that now Nvidia wants to define clear rules.... lol
Eagle
June 4th, 2003, 07:43
Ok, I'm not gonna close this thread. However, if the topic strays from the Nvidia/Futuremark Cheat issue like the first one, I will.

reference thread
http://www.emutalk.net/showthread.php?s=&threadid=14085
vampireuk
June 4th, 2003, 15:11
Originally posted by ra5555
opps, sorry wolf, :D I didn't know you posted before me. Anyway what are your guys' opinions?

I think Nvidia probably paid some big bucks to get off this one. How ironic is it that now Nvidia wants to define clear rules.... lol

Nah they set their jewish lawyers onto their jewish lawyers:D
Tagrineth
June 4th, 2003, 17:04
No, nVidia was threatening a lawsuit. (look up "libel")

Futuremark rescinded the 'cheat' allegations because, well, really, nVidia would crush FM in a lawsuit, simply because poor FM doesn't have anywhere near enough money for that. Sad, really. Why can't the States do what England does? Loser pays legal fees. :happy:

However, FM still maintains that the optimisations were not allowed, because 3DMark is supposed to be a level playing field.
Eagle
June 4th, 2003, 18:55
Well, we do. The loser pays the cost of the court and the lawyers are paid a percentage of what they win. Most lawyers dont get paid if they dont win.
AlphaWolf
June 4th, 2003, 22:15
Originally posted by Eagle
Well, we do. The loser pays the cost of the court and the lawyers are paid a percentage of what they win. Most lawyers dont get paid if they dont win.

That depends on several factors, to include local state/city laws, countersuits, agreements made with the attorney, etc.

I am pretty sure that england, for the most part, is the same way.

If legal action was threatened, I think that futuremark would have said so though.
Tagrineth
June 5th, 2003, 01:46
Originally posted by AlphaWolf
If legal action was threatened, I think that futuremark would have said so though.

Again. Libel.

How do you think it would sound to the general populace if people KNEW nVidia was threatening to sue over such an honestly petty issue?

Futuremark didn't say so for the same reason they rescinded the 'cheating' statement.
AlphaWolf
June 5th, 2003, 02:37
Originally posted by Tagrineth
Again. Libel.

How do you think it would sound to the general populace if people KNEW nVidia was threatening to sue over such an honestly petty issue?

Futuremark didn't say so for the same reason they rescinded the 'cheating' statement.

Well, libel is a false statement that was declared as a fact. If somebody tries or even threatens sue you, you can tell anybody you want, and theres nothing that the offending party can do about it, no matter how much it hurts them, because quite simply, its a fact.

Nvidia no doubt knows how their consumer market would respond to them dishing a legal threat against this. Quite honestly, neither side would have an easy time proving their case if there was a legal battle. They probably just came to the mutual agreement that this will not happen again, no lawyers, nada. Futuremark now has set the rules for what is a cheat and what isn't, nvidia now knows what they wont do in the future. It's as simple as that IMO.