Bethesda shortly afterward tried a new tactic and fired its first lawyer, replacing him and filing a second injunction, claiming that Interplay had only back-licensed the name "Fallout" but no content. Interplay has countered showing that the contract states that they must make "Fallout Online" that has the look and feel of "Fallout" and that in the event Interplay fails to meet the requirements (30 million minimum secure funding and "full scale" development by X date) that Interplay can still release the MMO but they have to remove all "Fallout" content. The contract then goes on to list all "Fallout" content as locations, monsters, settings and lore. Bethesda has known that Interplay would use "Fallout" elements via internet emails shown in court documents and that the contract was not just for the name. The second injunction by Bethesda was denied on August 4, 2011, by the courts. Bethesda then appealed the denial of their second preliminary injunction. Bethesda then sued Masthead Studios and asked for a restraining order against the company. Bethesda was denied this restraining order before Masthead Studios could call a counter-suit. Bethesda lost its appeal of the second injunction.