вообще-то 4:2 в пользу крайтек
ты там не торопись с покупкой видяхи - а то мож и не понадобится
DUKA вообще фишку не рубит, но писать уже спешит.
Добавлено через 3 минуты
The MTD is DENIED insofar as it seeks dismissal of all causes of action alleged against Defendant RSI;
А зачем ты там жирненьким выделил? Ход мыслей объясни.
До сих пор не разобрался?
1. RSI is a Party to the Contract
Defendants argue that because RSI did not sign the GLA, and the GLA and Amendment
define the “parties” as Crytek and CIG, RSI is not a party to the GLA. Thus, say Defendants, the
Court should dismiss the breach claims as alleged against RSI. In response, Crytek points to the
fact that RSI signed the ToC, and also argues that RSI’s other conduct—including publishing the
Press Release and Bugsmashers video series, and distributing and marketing Star Citizen with and
without display of Crytek’s trademark and copyright notices—amounts to the manifestation of
acceptance of the GLA. The Court first considers whether RSI’ssignature on the ToC makes it a
party to the GLA.
The goal of contract interpretation is to determine and enforcethe parties’ mutual intent at
the time the contract was formed. Thor Seafood Corp. v. Supply Mgmt. Servs., 352 F. Supp. 2d
1128, 1131 (C.D. Cal. 2005). The language of the contract alone governs the parties’ intention
and the contract’s meaning, so long as the language is clear, explicit, and does not involve an
absurdity. Cal. Civ. Code §§ 1638, 1639, see Waller v. Truck Ins. Exchange, Inc., 11 Cal. 4th 1,
18, 19 (1995) (“Courts will not strainto create ambiguity where none exists.”).
Here, the contractual language at issue is clear, and
RSI’s signature to the ToC indicates
that RSI was a party to the GLA. As explained in the Factual Background, the ToC’s term
definitions prevail in the face of a conflict between the ToC’s terms and those presented and
defined in the GLA. GLA at 21 [Doc. # 20-3 at 28].
“Licensee”in the ToC means the signatories
to the ToC, i.e., RSI and CIG. See id.at 21 (definition) [Doc. # 20-3 at 28], 24 (signature) [Doc.
# 20-3 at 31]. “Licensee” as defined in theGLA is only CIG.
Thus, the terms in the ToC prevail,
and “Licensee” as used in the GLA means both RSI and CIG. Moreover, the Amendment did not
alter any key terms as set forthin the GLA and its exhibits, including the ToC. SeeAmendment
at ¶¶ 1 (“Definitions[—]All capitalized terms herein shall be defined as set forth in the [GLA].”),
7.1 (“Except as expressly set forth herein, the [GLA] shall remain in full force and effect and is
hereby ratified.”).
Because Defendants are both parties to the GLA and other governing documents by virtue
of RSI’s signing the ToC, the Court DENIESthe MTD insofar as it seeks dismissal of Plaintiff’s
claims as to RSI.
The Court need not consider Plaintiff’s remaining arguments as to why RSI is
party to the GLA.
RSI подписала контракт, она участник процесса, без вариантов. Крис соснул по-полной.
Суд даже не требует от Crytek аргументировать, почему RSI участник процесса, судье это из самого контракта ясно как божий день.