Editorial: Gaming / Facebook / Twitter / Coverage / Instagram / Discord
The video game industry is no longer “child’s play” and is taken not only as an important business worldwide, but also as a serious form of entertainment.
Something that can be seen reflected in how this market is approached from the media, to even courts of law. The latter has been demonstrated in a trial between Brooks Entertainment against Activision-Blizzard, carried out in the United States.
You can read: They sue Sony accusing it of hiding a serious defect in the PlayStation 5 that makes it turn off completely
As indicated by the site specialized in Call of Duty Charlie Intel (via Level Up), the company dedicated to the entertainment sector Brooks Entertainment, sued Activision-Blizzard for plagiarism.
According to their allegations, Sergeant Sean Brooks from Call of Duty: Infinite Warfare is a copy of Shon Brooks, a character from one of Brooks Entertainment’s video games. This since they indicate: “Shon Brooks and Sean Brooks had unlimited resources and missiles; bring thieves to justice; they traveled to Mars, and both games had battle scenes written that took place in a high-fashion mall.”
Something that Activision’s lawyer discussed by showing some clips from the game, stressing that “many (if not virtually all) of the factual allegations in the Lawsuit were not accurate.” Among the points delivered, he said that Sean Brooks is not the protagonist of Infinite Warfare and doesn’t even look like the other character, as Brooks Entertainment alleged.
Evidence that the trial judge not only took as explanatory, but also scolded the plaintiff’s lawyer, saying that he could have realized all this, if he had played a few minutes Call of Duty: Infinite Warfare. Statement that he made since, as we indicated, the Court itself realized that the lawsuit did not make sense and without having knowledge of this video game franchise.
A trial that was not just a waste of time, as the judge ultimately ordered the plaintiff’s attorney to reimburse Activision for “reasonable attorneys’ fees and costs incurred in the litigation.”