Judge Makes Final Ruling in 7-Year-Old Counterfeit Pokies Case
The High Court has made the final ruling in Aristocrat’s case against Global Gaming Technology for countefeiting poker machines, a suit which is nearly a decade old.
Aristocrat has been embroiled in a bitter court case for 10 years, and it seems that the end is finally in sight. The High Court has made its latest and final ruling in regards to Global Gaming Technology allegedly counterfeiting Aristocrat pokies.
The case was originally brought forward when Aristocrat sought $500 000 in damages after Global Gaming Technology distributed games in overseas markets for which Aristocrat held the copyrights. While the two companies were involved in a joint venture to sell the games overseas, the defendant did not have the correct permissions to distribute the actual content that was sold. The copyrights of 618 Aristocrat slots were infringed upon.
“The seized materials included counterfeit copies of materials in which [Aristocrat] had the copyright,” said Judge Peter Jacobson when he ruled on the case in 2010. “Much of the seized materials consisted of computer hard drives but the materials included certain items of hardware and software which were an important part of the Aristocrat case.”
In 2010, the High Court ruled in favour of Aristocrat. The primary judge initially found the party guilty of infringing on Aristocrat’s rights but that it was was not liable since it had not existed as a company at the time. Over the course of the past seven years, there have been several appeals by both parties, and the court has finally decided that Aristocrat should be permitted to offset various costs owed.
According to Davies.com.au, Aristocrat owed Mr Allam (the named defendant) $100 000 for previous business transactions. Allam owes Aristocrat $700 000 for the infringement but Aristocrat owes Allam’s company over $100 000. Justice Perram allowed Aristocrat to offset the entirety of its High Court costs.
This has been a landmark case, because it is rare that an issue this complex is presented with regards to casino game copyrights. This decision will certainly set precedent should any other gaming operators find themselves in a similar situation in the future.