Search results
Results From The WOW.Com Content Network
Since these cases in 2012, legal scholars have found that courts have been more scrutinizing of look-and-feel in cases involving video game clones. [ 18 ] Despite warnings that the case might lead to an explosion of intellectual property disputes and copyright trolls , there has only been an incremental increase, with the courts applying this ...
In this instance, Saber Interactive held exclusive rights to depict the K-700 tractor in its game Mudrunner, yet Oovee used the same vehicle in its competing game, Spintires. The court found that video games are expressive works deserving of First Amendment protection and that Oovee’s use of the K-700 did not infringe on Saber’s trademarks.
Note: if no court name is given, according to convention, the case is from the Supreme Court of the United States.Supreme Court rulings are binding precedent across the United States; Circuit Court rulings are binding within a certain portion of it (the circuit in question); District Court rulings are not binding precedent, but may still be referred to by other courts.
Sony drew support from fellow video game hardware manufacturers Nintendo, Sega, and 3dfx Interactive, while Connectix was backed by fellow software firms and trade associations. [2] The district court awarded Sony an injunction blocking Connectix from copying or using the Sony BIOS code in the development of the Virtual Game Station for Windows ...
The case was filed in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California, which ruled in favor of Sega and issued an injunction against Accolade preventing them from publishing any more games for the Genesis and requiring them to recall all the existing Genesis games they had for sale. Accolade appealed the decision to the Ninth ...
[4] [5] The court refused to grant an injunction against Activision, and the two companies settled out of court in 1982, leading to the first official third-party video games for the Atari VCS. [5] [6] Soon after, the United States saw the proliferation of video game consoles, as well as many low-quality games produced by third-party developers ...
Settled outside of court, 1990: Case history; Prior actions: Letter of Request from Nintendo to Blockbuster, requesting cessation of manual reproduction. Court membership; Judge sitting: Alfred M. Wolin: Case opinions; The photocopying of video game manuals was an infringement of copyright, but the rental of video games was completely legal.
The Ninth Circuit further distinguished the cases because the Napster defendants operated a system that allowed them to monitor and control the potentially infringing activities of its users. [20] In MGM Studios, Inc. v. Grokster, Ltd. in 2005, the Supreme Court extended this analysis to advanced video file-sharing systems. [21]