Antonick v. Electronic Arts, Inc.,
Filing
352
ORDER by Judge Charles R. Breyer granting in part and denying in part 290 Motion for Summary Judgment; denying as moot 300 Motion to Strike. (crblc1, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 4/25/2013)
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
9
FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
United States District Court
For the Northern District of California
10
11
ROBIN ANTONICK,
12
Plaintiff,
13
14
15
No. C 11-01543 CRB
ORDER GRANTING IN PART AND
DENYING IN PART DEFENDANT’S
THIRD MOTION FOR SUMMARY
JUDGMENT, DENYING AS MOOT
DEFENDANT’S MOTION TO STRIKE
v.
ELECTRONIC ARTS INC,
Defendant.
/
16
17
On April 19, 2013, the Court held a hearing on Defendant Electronic Arts Inc.’s Third
18
Motion for Summary Judgment (dkt. 290). At the conclusion of that hearing, the Court took
19
Defendant’s Motion under submission. The Court is mindful that the parties would like to
20
know the Court’s rulings as soon as possible in order to prepare for trial, which is set to begin
21
in less than a month. Accordingly, the Court makes the following rulings, and will provide a
22
detailed explanation for such rulings in a separate and subsequent order.
23
24
25
First, the Court finds that Antonick’s contract claim for unpaid royalties is limited to
derivative works within the meaning of United States copyright law.
Second, the Court finds that, of the similarities identified by Plaintiff’s expert, only
26
two – “field width” and “plays and formations” – are potentially protectable under copyright
27
law, and that a jury should determine the issue of substantial similarity. Accordingly, the
28
Court GRANTS the Motion as to all of the similarities other than those two.
1
Third, the Court DENIES the Motion as to the other contract claims.
2
Fourth, the Court DENIES the Motion as to the fraud claim. The Court has serious
3
concerns about the fraud claim, but finds that it will be in a better position to rule on that
4
claim once the evidence has been presented at trial.
5
Fifth, as the Court does not rely on Garry Kitchen’s report in resolving the Motion for
6
Summary Judgment, EA’s Motion to Strike that report (dkt. 300) is DENIED AS MOOT;
7
EA may re-notice the Motion to Strike in connection with trial.
8
IT IS SO ORDERED.
9
United States District Court
For the Northern District of California
10
CHARLES R. BREYER
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
Dated: April 25, 2013
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
G:\CRBALL\2011\1543\order re MSJ copyright - short.wpd
2
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.
Why Is My Information Online?