I was thinking to myself last night about how stuff in the GLA didn't make sense, like that indemnification clause, etc.
After thinking about it some more, it all started making sense when I went back to the original context. In Nov 2012 (when the GLA was signed), CryTek was the big guy on the block, and CIG was the totally new kid with about ?$4 million? $6 million? CryTek's position then was, "Hey, anybody can license our engine for a fee, BUT, we aren't going to support you in any of your endeavors (beyond fixing anything that is broken on our end), and don't come crying to us if you lose all your money and/or make a crap game and lose money / want to blame us for it. And don't try to make any money trying to re-license out our engine, that is our legal right."
I'm still having trouble believing that CryTek would then, 5 years later, twist all the logic of the GLA inside-out and on its head (as well as not even disclose the GLA to the court), but I guess they really are desperate.
Still waiting to hear what their next filing will bring, the only thing I think they have that is viable in any way is the "revealing code via Bug Smashers" thing, but, I don't think they can expect any body really thinks they were damaged by that, and would then deserve any money.