Court Dismisses Some of Aristocrat’s Claims against L&W

The Nevada District Court has dismissed some of Aristocrat Leisure’s claims against Light & Wonder, allowing only key claims to move forward. For context, the former company filed the suit earlier this year, alleging that the latter has committed an intellectual property violation.

Speaking of which, Judge Gloria Navarro allowed the copyright and trade secret-related claims to proceed, dismissing smaller claims including ones alleging that Light & Wonder engaged in deceptive practices and trade dress infringement.

As a result, Aristocrat will now have three weeks to fix the aforementioned points in its main complaint.

In a statement provided to NEXT.io, Aristocrat said that it is “pleased” that the court has upheld its main claims. The company reiterated its commitment to “strongly protect its IP.” In the meantime, L&W declined to comment.

Aristocrat Says L&W Infringed on Its Intellectual Property

As mentioned, the original lawsuit was filed by Aristocrat, which believes that its competitor manufacturer might have taken inspiration too far when producing its Dragon Train games. Aristocrat emphasized that the titles are eerily similar to its own Dragon Link slots, suggesting copyright infringement.

The plaintiff further pointed out that Emma Charles and Lloyd Sefton, who worked on Dragon Link have allegedly participated in the production of Dragon Train as well, adding to the credibility of the claims.

Judge Navarro agreed that Aristocrat has provided sufficient information about how its confidential game information might have been misappropriated. Despite that, the judge did not quite agree with the way in which Aristocrat described the look and feel of its games, urging it to use less vague language.

Light & Wonder Faces Another Challenge

Light & Wonder is currently fighting a battle on two fronts as it is also facing a lawsuit by Evolution. The latter company’s claims are similar to those of Aristocrat, alleging that L&W has violated its intellectual property.

In this case, Evolution claimed that created several products copying its Lighting Roulette game using proprietary information from an unsuccessful collaboration project.

Legal experts believe that these cases could significantly impact public interest and industry standards.

Evolution itself is also no stranger to legal conflicts and is currently embroiled in another legal matter. For context, the company is currently working hard to uncover the sponsors of the controversial Calcagni Report and is leading a prolonged legal battle against Calcagni & Kanefsky (C&K).