Tweet
From my understanding of random Youtube comments on the video Youtuber Law made on about the topic (Youtuber Law claims to have tried to make them settle so both games could come out, but both rejected):
- The original creators and the publisher had a deal to live and let live. The original creators owned the assets of SC1&2 while the publisher owned the rights to the the name "Star Control" and what assets in SC3 that aren't overlapping with SC1&2.
- The publisher wanted the original creators to buy the name. They refused.
- The publisher then wanted the creators to license the assets to them multiple times. The original creators refused.
- The publisher tried to sue the original creators for a lot of money to pressure them to hand over the rights to SC1&2 assets.
- The original creators sue back.
- The publisher, with an ongoing and unresolved lawsuit, goes on with production, marketing and release.
- Knowing that a game makes most of its money in the first 3-6 months of release, the original creators bide their time to do the DMCA takedowns.
- The publisher goes to court for an injunction (to hold off the DMCA takedowns until the original cases are settled), but the judge blames the publisher for going through with the game's production/marketing/release even if they knew there was a pending case.
- The game was taken down on Steam and GOG through DMCA by the original creators, but this was the decision of Steam and GOG.
- The publisher is still selling the game through their website and supposedly another storefront.
Comment