Aviator LLC Pushes Back Against Spribe over UK Court Injunction

The dispute between Georgian developer Aviator LLC and gaming company Spribe continues to escalate, with both parties trading barbs over the implications of a recent UK court decision. While Spribe touted the development as a significant victory, Aviator contends that the case is far from over and that its rival is pushing a false narrative.

Aviator Alleges That Spribe Distorted Court Facts

Last week, Spribe announced that it had secured an interim injunction from the High Court in London, blocking Aviator LLC from releasing its own version of the “Aviator” crash game in the United Kingdom. Spribe described the ruling as a victory in court, framing it as confirmation that the Georgian firm had copied its successful product and was seeking to poach its British clientele.

Aviator LLC maintains that the reality is very different. The firm was adamant that the injunction represents a limited procedural step with no commercial or legal value outside of temporarily preserving the status quo until trial. Aviator noted that the court made no ruling on ownership of the game or copyright infringement, invalidating Spribe’s claims.

We look forward to presenting the merits of our claim in the UK as well as other markets, and we remain confident of our ultimate success in this matter.

Nikoloz Gogilidze, legal representative for Aviator LLC

The Georgian operator also noted that it has no immediate plans to bring its offerings to the UK, making the injunction mostly symbolic. Aviator LLC’s legal representative, Nikoloz Gogilidze, drew attention to the fact that the company had not applied for a UKGC license, which is necessary to conduct operations in the country. However, he added that the injunction did not prevent Aviator from applying.

Neither Company Is Willing to Back Down

The ongoing conflict revolves around the increasingly popular “crash” games. Spribe secured its Aviator game licensed for the UK market in 2020, and it was an instant success. Spribe has alleged that Aviator LLC has produced a “copycat” version under the same name and then sought to poach its customers. Aviator LLC maintains that it is the actual creator of the game and brand concept, referring to a conclusive victory in Georgia early this year. 

The UK case sharply contrasts the situation in Georgia. In London, Spribe not only attempted to stop Aviator LLC from offering its services but also tried to bar it from using the Aviator brand name and from making public statements of ownership. The court denied these broader restrictions, leading to the current injunction.

According to the UK court’s recent decision, Spribe must compensate Aviator LLC for any losses if later proceedings conclude that the order was incorrect. According to Aviator, this ruling reinforces its claims that the court seeks to avoid disruptions during the trial. With no conclusion in sight, both parties seem determined to make their positions public and press on with the proceedings.