I have been ignoring this thread other then checking in once a day to see if their has been a press release before I go to bed.....I figured we are still days away from that, maybe Friday, maybe not. Until a Press Release I have better things to do...

 

Cheers

The licence servers will be shutdown. Microsoft can't run licence servers for products they no longer own.

LMOC will be embroiled in a lawsuit with the new owners - billions will be at stake.

LMOC stops selling to simmers and strictly enforces their licence - simmers abandon(ed) in droves

Re-activations of MSFS requires payment to new owners

New owner brings back Flight and DLC

Previous un-released DLC put up for purchase - money rolls in

Simmers up in arms

Riots in the streets

Governments declare marshal law

Third party developers go bankrupt

The economy slumps

...

 

 

This could be the catalyst for the end of humanity.  

 

 

I have no problem with that! If it is open to third party and remains on the PC . Flight is a superior model.

Absolutely agree, I would be a happy camper.

The licence servers will be shutdown. Microsoft can't run licence servers for products they no longer own.

 

Wont happen im afraid as they ( Microsoft ) would have to release a patch that disables product activation for fsx as if they stopped people from using fsx im sure they would have a lot of people wanting to take them to court and that could cost more than what they sold the franchise for.

The licence servers will be shutdown. Microsoft can't run licence servers for products they no longer own.

LMOC will be embroiled in a lawsuit with the new owners - billions will be at stake.

LMOC stops selling to simmers and strictly enforces their licence - simmers abandon(ed) in droves

Re-activations of MSFS requires payment to new owners

New owner brings back Flight and DLC

Previous un-released DLC put up for purchase - money rolls in

Simmers up in arms

Riots in the streets

Governments declare marshal law

Third party developers go bankrupt

The economy slumps

...

From all that I have read so far, primarily based on Tom's comments about past negotiations of which he has been a part, Microsoft is NOT selling their OWNERSHIP of the Flight Sim franchise - (whether FSX, Flight, or both) - rather, they are selling a LICENSE to the franchise to an outside (non-Microsoft) entity.

 

There is a significant difference between those two concepts. I think many people are focusing on the word "sale", when (I believe) the key word is "license".

 

Though not directly comparable, It is somewhat like the difference between leasing an automobile from a dealer, or purchasing it outright.

 

I have a feeling that the new, still secret "deal" between Microsoft and the as-yet-unnamed entity will be similar to the arrangement where MS sold licenses to the ESP IP to both Lockheed Martin and Northrup. This involved giving those two organizations free and unrestricted access to the core ESP intellectual property - the source code, the associated art work, graphics, databases, and custom development tools not available to end users or 3rd party developers. Both organizations were given the right to improve, expand, extend, and update the original ESP source as they see fit, and to sell the improved version(s) under their own name... which is exactly what LM has done with P3D. I don't know what, if anything, Northrup has done with their ESP license - I have a feeling they may be using it strictly for in-house projects that will never be made available to the general public.

 

The point is that MS, to the best of my knowledge, still owns ESP itself, and I am pretty sure, going forward, that MS will continue to retain ownership of the core FSX/Flight intellectual property. i doubt very much that they would ever sell that IP outright. If this upcoming deal was an outright sale, the word "license" would not be in play.

 

There are probably many other aspects of this deal that will never be made public. Like LM, the new licensee will likely have the right to update, improve, expand, modify the original IP into a new version uniquely their own, but there is very likely going to be some return of a percentage of any profits from sales of the new version(s) back to Microsoft - just as the owner of a local branch of national restaurant franchise (McDonalds, Pizza Hut etc), has to return a percetage of profits on sales back to the corporation who grants the local franchise.

 

If, in fact, the deal DOES include FSX IP, I doubt that the new owner is going to be involved in ongoing support of ->FSX<- activations - which is to say that FSX, IN IT'S CURRENT FORM, might very well continue to be a Microsoft product. However, any new version built upon the existing FSX core, will NOT be a Microsoft product, but rather, a product of the new licensee, to be sold and supported as they see fit.

 

The new licensee might use their access to the original FS core to produce a new, much improved, flight simulator, or perhaps a train simulator, or a ship simulator, or maybe all three in one. Or maybe NONE of those things.

 

In any case, I am 100% certain that whatever the final arrangement turns out to be, the new license will have absolutely no control whatsoever (from a legal aspect) over P3D. If the new licensee does produce an improved, upgraded flight simulator, that may well eventually have an impact of P3D sales to non-professional users - that's simple competition in the marketplace - but idea that the new licensee would have the right to sue LM to force them to stop selling P3D Is absurd.

 

Going back to the analogy about leasing automobiles from a dealership, just because two customers have both leased (i.e. "licensed") the right to use an automobile from the same dealer, that does NOT mean that those two customers have any legal right to dictate TO EACH OTHER how their individual automobiles can or will be used. The DEALER has that right - he can dictate maximum number of miles driven per year, require that the car be properly maintained at all times, permit or prohibit commercial use of the vehicle, permit or prohibit modifications, (changing the paint scheme, adding custom sound systems etc.) and the terms of a lease with one customer may be very different than the terms with another.

 

Micosoft's license of ESP to LM is between Microsoft and LM. Their license of the entertainment FS franchise with the "new entity" is between MS and that entity. Neither LM or the new entity (whoever it might be), can have any possible legal standing to control what the other does.

 

Again, all of the preliminary information that has been released so far talks about a "license" to the FS Franchise, not an outright sale where Microsoft forever gives up their legal ownership of the core IP of Flight and/or FSX.

My 2 ct:

 

1. Google bought "Skybox" (http://investor.google.com/releases/2014/0609.html - for 500 million USD in cash) in order to have access to their satellite images (for goole maps). So they have world wide photo real scenery.

2. They also bought (allegedly) the FS software from MS.

3. They already have the most accurate vector data, elevation data and map data.

4. They will buy Steve's DX10-Fixer and incorporate it in the new porduct.

5. Finally they will buy the "World2xplane" business (see x-plane-forum here at AVSIM) or simply copy the idea!

 

And: Tada!!!

 

We have a worldwide simulator with unparalelled scenery and FLIGHT!-like flight dynamics. Not a bad product, don't you agree?

 

Third party developers can sell their products (aka: App) over a webshop.

 

EDIT: And they would hire Holger Sandmann to bring all this together ^_^

Ground Hog Day again.

It is quite astounding how much time people spend demanding, speculating, guessing etc...

 

If only we spend all this time learning to fly better or even trying to develop add-ons for the games/'simulators' we have. We all know, or should know that who ever is developing a sim of sorts is doing it for the bottom line financially, instead of trying to pacify a bunch of people who are bleating on forums such as this.

 

Interesting to see people comparing the flight models & business plans between FSX, P3D & Flight, when we all know, or should know that all 3 are totally different in scope, target market & plans.

 

All this talk about Lockheed... we KNOW they are not into gaming &, I stand corrected, they have enough hassles dealing with the 'non entertainment' user.

Why, would they ever want to get involved in gaming? Especially after the experiences they have had on all the forums.

 

So, lets see where our Flight will eventually take us.

Meanwhile, back to our cockpits.

I don't know what "franchise" means in the context of all this. and I don't think many others do either. If it means branding, then it could have nothing to do with a new or old FSX. LM has the ESP code, that's FSX essentially, and they market it under there own name as a unique product.

 

Someone apparently bought the license to the FS "Franchise"? So that means to me they just bought the right to a name with the agreement to pay Microsoft for the use of that name. What ensues will not be a new FSX.

But like everyone else I'm just speculating with my head in the sand.

 

 

Micosoft's license of ESP to LM is between Microsoft and LM. Their license of the entertainment FS franchise with the "new entity" is between MS and that entity. Neither LM or the new entity (whoever it might be), can have any possible legal standing to control what the other does.

 

They can have a legal right depending on the terms of the francise licence.

Could this perhaps be an alaborate subterfuge on behalf of MS to sponsor the development of FLIGHT/FSX into a mind boggling FS11 without losing face?

 

Hmmmmm

They can have a legal right depending on the terms of the francise licence.

 

Neither would be stupid enough to enter an agreement, with millions of dollars spent to license an engine, that would allow that. 

 

When you license an engine for use, what you create becomes your intellectual property. Crysis can't go sue Far Cry to stop selling because they both use CryEngine. And the creators of CryEngine, once they sell a license of use, can't demand MechWarrior stop selling copies one day.

 

Someone earlier was making a big deal about the difference between LM buying or licensing ESP, as if MS could walk in one day and rip the code out from under them at their whim because it was a "license." That's just not how it works. 

 

Yeah, I don't know the actual agreement. It's at least possible LM and this new buyer entered into horrible agreements that totally go against industry standards. The chances of that are near zero though.

However this shakes out I will never take MSFlight off my hard drives. Even when we loose miltiplayer function next month that I have just started to really enjoy. It is just too good. I really do hope to see further development of some kind. We will just wait and see.

 

Steve 

So... no official news yet. The only places I can find this are on are other sites referencing each other.

 

What is the point in off-the-record press releases/leaks if there isn't anything to back it up? I'm starting to think  this is really bad smoke.

 

Best regards,

Robin.

From all that I have read so far, primarily based on Tom's comments about past negotiations of which he has been a part, Microsoft is NOT selling their OWNERSHIP of the Flight Sim franchise - (whether FSX, Flight, or both) - rather, they are selling a LICENSE to the franchise to an outside (non-Microsoft) entity.

 

That's been my interpretation all along. Nobody but MS "owns" the software. Just as when we buy a piece of software, we are licensed to use it and never truly own it. We are paying for the privilege to use that title . Full control is still held by say licensee. Of course what can and can't be done is in the EULA agreement.

 

 As far as announcements. May never be a so called "public announcement" Like a big press release. After all, ITS JUST a game! Billion dollar companies are bought and so regularly without any fanfare announcements. They, who ever that may be, may chose to announce on local interest sites?

I think this is all a plot by Tom to drive up traffic so he can make millions off the advertising sales!