Spribe has secured a procedural victory in its ongoing copyright dispute with Aviator LLC after a High Court decision clarified how parts of the case should be assessed under international legal frameworks.
The ruling relates to a broader legal battle concerning the rights to the visual identity used in Aviator-branded crash games, a design that has become widely recognized in the online casino sector. The dispute is linked to claims brought across multiple jurisdictions, with both sides contesting ownership and usage of the aircraft-themed imagery central to the game’s branding.
Aviator LLC, a vehicle associated with Georgian businessman Temur Ugulava, has been pursuing copyright claims in several countries that operate under the Berne Convention. The UK proceedings form one part of this wider legal strategy, which focuses on whether earlier rulings from Georgian courts can restrict arguments in other jurisdictions.
At the center of the dispute is the question of whether Georgian court decisions can prevent issues from being revisited in England and other territories. This issue is significant because it affects how overlapping copyright claims are handled across different legal systems.
Spribe, which distributes its Aviator-branded crash game in multiple markets including the UK, holds trademarks related to the game’s visual elements and denies allegations of copying. The company previously obtained an interim injunction against Aviator LLC ahead of a full trial scheduled for August last year.
Court Rejects English Law Argument on Preclusion
The latest decision was delivered on 22 May by deputy judge Michael Tappin KC. The court examined whether English law or foreign law should determine the impact of Georgian judgments on related copyright disputes.
Aviator LLC argued that English law should govern the question of whether Georgian rulings create binding issue estoppels, including in cases involving foreign copyright claims. The court, however, rejected this position.
Tappin KC concluded that EU-derived private international law principles, which continue to apply in English courts, require judges to apply the relevant national law for each copyright territory under review when assessing the effect of earlier decisions.
He stated: “…a rule of law relating to preclusive effect, which states whether a party is prevented from disputing (or establishing, as the case may be) one or more elements of a cause of action for an infringement of an intellectual property right, is part of the applicable law under Articles 8 and 15.”
The ruling effectively supports Spribe’s position on how international copyright issues should be evaluated within the UK proceedings, particularly where multiple jurisdictions are involved, according to Next.io.
Ownership Issues Left for Trial
The court also dismissed Aviator LLC’s request for a separate hearing on copyright ownership. The judge said ownership could not be separated from wider factual and legal disputes involving Georgian law.
Tappin KC added: “I can see no reason why ownership should be plucked out from all the other issues and decided in advance.”
No findings were made on ownership or alleged copying, and those questions remain for the full trial.
The decision narrows procedural arguments while leaving the central copyright dispute unresolved as the case moves toward trial.
The post UK High Court Issues Procedural Ruling in Spribe Copyright Case first appeared on RealMoneyAction.com.