Epic confident it will be ‘vindicated’ in court

The Gears of War developer is standing its ground against the claims made by Too Human developer, Silicon Knights.
Following up on our report yesterday regarding Silicon Knights’ success in having its claims against Epic and their licensing of Unreal Engine 3 heard in court, the company behind Gears of War have hit back.
In a statement to IncGamers, provided by a representative of Epic Games, the studio that it ‘remains confident that it will be fully vindicated at trial’ and that the court had, under the rules of civil procedure, acknowledged that ‘it had to allow a jury to consider both sides’ evidence on the remaining claims’.
Epic’s statement also points out that the court had previously rejected Silicon Knights’ attempts at having Epic’s claims against it dismissed. These include claims by Epic that Silicon Knights had ‘breached its license agreement, stole Epic’s technology and infringed Epic’s copyrights.’
We’ve provided the full statement from Epic below, in full, for those interested.
This legal quarrel is not the only one involving videogame companies at present. With Ubisoft taking on THQ, EA battling Activision and LG still fighting with Sony over Blu-Ray patents, it seems the industry is dead set against playing happy families.
That Epic statement in full:
On March 24, 2011, the federal court in the lawsuit between Silicon Knights and Epic Games completed its ruling on the parties’ summary judgment motions to dismiss each other’s claims without a trial.

The court entered judgment in favor of Epic on several claims, rejecting Silicon Knights’ claims that it could cancel its license agreement, that Epic interfered with its contractual relationships with publishers, and that Epic has acted unjustly under the license.

The court did not rule on the merits of Silicon Knights’ remaining claims. The court was not permitted to judge the credibility of witnesses or evidence, or otherwise take into account Epic’s opposing evidence, and therefore merely acknowledged that, under the rules of civil procedure, it had to allow a jury to consider both sides’ evidence on the remaining claims.

Allowing those claims to move forward to a jury is not a ruling on their merits. The court simply concluded that the disputed evidence should be heard and resolved by the jury.

In addition, the court had previously rejected Silicon Knights’ motion to summarily dismiss Epic’s claims against it and upheld Epic’s right to present all of its claims to a jury, including claims that Silicon Knights breached its license agreement, stole Epic’s technology and infringed Epic’s copyrights.

Epic remains confident that it will be fully vindicated at trial.