The games industry isn't as strongly associated with legal tussling as its tech cousin or siblings in entertainment. The sums aren't as eye-boggling, the wrongdoings rarely as scandalous.

But clashes over video games and their treasures, are rarely boring. The gaming market is projected to be worth over $100 billion in 2017, and where there's money, there will be lawyers, there will be courts, and often, there will be parties making spurious claims to another's riches.

The handful of stories below are a clutch of many more which, in spite of their eventual failure, were fascinating to watch and won't be forgotten any time soon.

1. Digital Homicide vs Jim Sterling

this image is not availablepinterest
Bear Grylls//Digital Spy

Game critics regularly say things that developers don't like, and rightly so. Less regular is the practice of suing critics in response.

Back in November 2014, video game critic and YouTuber Jim Sterling posted a video which heavily criticised first person shooter Slaughtering Grounds. The video, titled "SLAUGHTERING GROUNDS – New 'Worst Game Of 2014' Contender", features an occasionally damning commentary – "this shit is beyond the pale" – but for the most part lets the game speak for itself.

The game's developer, Digital Homicide, wasn't impressed by Sterling's appraisal, unleashing a torrent of anger at the games critic and re-uploading Sterling's review with text notes "reviewing the reviewer". In response to that, among other provocations, Sterling published further videos alleging that some assets for Slaughtering Grounds could be found from a basic Google image search and that he believed Digital Homicide was suppressing negative commentary of the game on Steam.

youtubeView full post on Youtube

This back and forth continued for some time, leading to more reviews of reviews, a terrible interview between the pair, and a general rise in hostilities. In March 2016, James Romine of Digital Homicide began a lawsuit against Sterling, accusing him of libel, slander and assault, whilst seeking $10m in damages.

The lawsuit was brought to a close after exchanges between Romine and Sterling's lawyer, who convinced Romine that pursuing it further simply wasn't worth it. In a post on his website, Sterling lamented the case's year-long progress. "That it got as far as it did, went on for as long as it did, is atrocious – especially when this is a case that amounts to a game developer wanting to silence a game critic."

2. Lindsay Lohan vs Rockstar

this image is not availablepinterest
Bear Grylls//Digital Spy

Lindsay Lohan's beef with Rockstar fascinated the gaming and mainstream press.

In 2014, Lohan initiated a lawsuit against Rockstar for using her likeness in GTA 5 without permission. The Mean Girls star claimed that the character "Lacey Jonas", was "unequivocally" a reference to her. In addition to featuring in the game's promotional artwork, Jonas is the focus of an in-game side mission where the player must escort her home to avoid the paparazzi.

The visual similarities between her and Jonas were, at least to the casual onlooker, sparing, and the suit seemed to be clutching at straws. Arguments like "the Plaintiff has been using the peace sign hand gesture for years before and after its use in the video game", were used to justify Lohan's claim.

The suit was thrown out in 2016, not only because Rockstar didn't use a single image of Lohan or reference her by name, but because GTA 5 is a video game, and therefore afforded the same first amendment protections as other works of fiction in the US. Even if Rockstar were poking fun at Lohan, or someone vaguely resembling her, it's not necessary to obtain someone's permission in order to satirise them.

3. King vs Stoic (Candy Crush Saga vs The Banner Saga)

this image is not availablepinterest
Bear Grylls//Digital Spy

On the one hand you have The Banner Saga, a turn-based strategy game inspired by Viking mythology. On the other hand you have Candy Crush Saga, the ubiquitous mobile game about moving around coloured sweets. On paper the two have very little in common, but that didn't stop Candy Crush developer, King, from throwing its weight around over use of the word "Saga".

Before The Banner Saga was released in 2014, King had already filed an objection to the the game's application for a mark, citing its ownership of games like Candy Crush Saga, Bubble Saga, and Pyramid Saga. Stoic hired a lawyer in response, hoping to delay the process whilst it developed the game and found a solution.

this image is not availablepinterest
Bear Grylls//Digital Spy

Luckily for Stoic, its saviour came in the form of publicity. After the dispute hopped from the specialist gaming press into mainstream reporting, the negative PR became a nightmare for King. Not only was it the big bad multimillion-dollar company shoving around the group of indie developers, but its claims that the trademarks were "deceptively similar" were met with derision. It's an Old Norse word that's perfect for The Banner Saga and definitely has nothing to do with candy.

King's previous attempts to trademark the word "candy" in the US, which were also met with outrage, probably didn't help matters for the company.

In the end, King reached a deal with Stoic which enabled it to keep the name The Banner Saga as long as it never created games with names like The Banner Saga Crush or similar. King achieved very little whilst handing tonnes of positive publicity to an already beloved indie game.

4. Universal vs Nintendo

this image is not availablepinterest
Bear Grylls//Digital Spy

These days Nintendo and Universal are cosying up to produce theme park attractions, but back in the early 80s, the two were in a legal spat over Donkey Kong.

Seeing the great success of Donkey Kong, Universal began demanding that companies pay it royalties on the basis that Donkey Kong's characters and plot were derivative of King Kong. Nintendo refused to submit, and Universal launched a copyright infringement case against the Japanese developer, which had just made its foray into the US market.

Unfortunately for Universal, the suit would end in an enormous facepalm. During the trial, which lasted seven days, Nintendo argued that Universal itself had previously proven that the rights to King Kong rested in the public domain during a suit with RKO pictures, the makers of the original 1933 King Kong movie, a few years earlier.

this image is not availablepinterest
Bear Grylls//Digital Spy

The court ruled in favour of the defendant and Nintendo was allowed to continue using Donkey Kong, with the judge criticising Universal for asserting rights over properties it didn't actually own and bullying "companies incapable of or unwilling to confront Universal's "profit center.""

The lawyer representing Nintendo, John Kirby, was given a $30,000 sailing boat called 'Donkey Kong' by means of thanks. It's suspected that the Nintendo character, Kirby, was named in honor of him.

5. Tim Langdell vs the world

this image is not availablepinterest
Bear Grylls//Digital Spy

Tim Langdell's name is notorious in the games industry for the many lawsuits he's initiated and legal threats he's delivered to inboxes. Over a period spanning decades, he's earned himself the title of "trademark troll" for constant actions against anyone daring to infringe upon his mark "The Edge".

"The Edge" was a videogame publisher, initially called Softek, founded in 1979 by Langdell. The company was initially actively involved in game development, but this productivity tailed off in the late eighties. People have speculated that The Edge's primary reason for existing in its latter years could have been for Landgell to bring trademark infringement claims against others, demanding that they license the name from him and pay him a share of the profits.

this image is not availablepinterest
Bear Grylls//Digital Spy

Langdell's disputes were many. He tussled with Namco over the game Soul Edge, which was renamed Soul Blade, and then in sequels, Soul Calibur. He initiated a trademark infringement lawsuit against EA over Mirror's Edge. He took up against Sony because of PlayStation Edge. The list goes on, and includes a diverse range of companies from hardware producers like Razer (yep, the Razer Edge was seized upon) as well as media companies like Future Publishing, which was forced to license the mark from Langdell to start Edge magazine.

One particularly nasty case in 2009 saw Langdell force excellent indie game "Edge" off the iTunes store and demand restitution, even if the name was changed.

The nightmare came to something approaching a close in 2013 when Langdell eventually lost his trademarks. EA had taken him to court with the specific goal of removing his control, and won. The terror had lost his Edge.

From: Digital Spy