In November 2006, Interplay, headed by Herve Caen, filed a Form 8-K filing to the United States Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) regarding a potential Fallout massively multiplayer online game. In April 2007, Bethesda Softworks, the developer of Fallout 3, purchased full rights to the Fallout IP for $5.75 million USD. While Bethesda now owned the rights to the Fallout MMO IP as well, clauses in the purchase agreement state allowed Interplay to license the rights to the development of the MMO. Specific requirements were stated in the agreement that if not met, Interplay would immediately lose and forfeit its license rights for Fallout. Development must have begun within 24 months of the date of the agreement (April 4, 2007), and Interplay must have secured $30 million within that time frame or forfeit its rights to license. Interplay would furthermore need to launch the MMOG within 4 years of the beginning of development, and pay Bethesda 12 percent of sales and subscription fees for the use of the IP.

On April 2, 2009 Interplay announced a binding letter of intent with Masthead Studios, a Bulgarian-based developer, to fund the development of a post-apocalyptic MMO codenamed Project V13, which has been all but confirmed to be the aforementioned Fallout MMO. Masthead and Interplay teams will work together under the direction and control of Interplay to complete development of the project.

On April 15, 2009, it was announced that Bethesda Softworks moved to rescind the Fallout MMORPG license.

On September 8, 2009 Bethesda filed its original lawsuit against Interplay in the Maryland District Court in Baltimore. In October 2009, Interplay filed its own counter-lawsuit, arguing Bethesda is in breach of contract and the contract to sell the rights to the series to Bethesda is null and void and Interplay owns the franchise again.

On December 10, 2009, Bethesda’s motion for preliminary injunction was denied.

Since being denied its motion, Bethesda has employed Steptoe & Johnson and filed an appeal with the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit.  DLA Piper, Bethesda’s previous firm, has been withdrawn from further proceedings.

Duck and Cover has a partial transcript of the preliminary injunction hearing and periodically updates information regarding the appeal.  After reading through the partial transcript, I have a feeling I know part of the reason Bethesda opted to change firms: their original attorney appeared to be confused as to what, exactly, a preliminary injunction is intended to do.