Activision sues EA for $400 million

By Tom Bramwell Published 22 December, 2010

Challenge everything.

Activision has filed suit against Electronic Arts seeking $400 million in damages as part of its ongoing litigation against two former Infinity Ward executives.

The Call of Duty publisher alleged that EA began luring Jason West and Vince Zampella away from it in late July 2009, with COO John Schappert tapping the pair up via email.

Former Microsoft executive Seamus Blackley, an agent at talent agency Creative Artists, then helped brokered a meeting that saw the duo flown to EA CEO John Riccitiello's home by private jet, according to Activision's filing.

The amended cross-complaint reiterated a lot of Activision's previously publicised beef with West and Zampella, whom it claimed were delaying pre-production on Modern Warfare 3 and preventing employees receiving additional compensation for their very successful work.

West and Zampella have always maintained that the allegations were "false and outrageous".

Having been fired by Activision bosses at the start of the year, the pair set up Respawn Entertainment and signed a deal with Electronic Arts, the fruits of which we've yet to see. According to Activision's legal action, the studio poached around 40 former Infinity Ward employees in the process.

Activision Publishing CEO Eric Hirshberg said earlier this week that there's "still a lot of talent" inside Infinity Ward despite the departures.

Picture of Tom.

About Tom Bramwell

Tom is Operations director of Eurogamer Network and Editor-at-Large of Eurogamer.net. He joined the company in February 2000. Follow him on Twitter.

Read more articles from Tom by visiting the Tom Bramwell archive page.

You may also like...

Comments (48) Latest comment 1 year ago

Comments for this article are now closed, but please feel free to continue chatting on the forum!

  • GrizzleBoy #1 1 year ago

    lol

  • ubergine #2 1 year ago

    You should publish the detailed version, I read earlier on Joystiq I think. The two Infinity Ward guys come across as being much bigger arseholes than they've been portrayed so far.

    If there's anything better for a news story than mega arseholes versus the little guys, its arseholes versus arseholes in an expensive duel to the death. NO MATTER WHO LOSES, WE WIN.

  • NegativeZero #3 1 year ago

    It's pretty obvious what's happened here:

    1. Infinity Ward guys were sick of being forced to do Call of Duty games over and over
    2. EA attempts to poach them, puts an offer on the table
    3. Infinity Ward guys go to Activision looking for a counteroffer. Probably an ultimatum like "we don't want to make Modern Warfare 3, we want to make our own game. Let us make our own game or we'll leave."
    4. Both sides refuse to back down, MW3 gets delayed, morale goes through the floor
    5. Activision kicks out the pair because they were going to leave anyway, in an attempt to try and mitigate the bonus royalties and various payouts they would be entitled to have. They had no choice but to act, because the longer that the unhappy people at the top were there the more that would affect the whole studio.
    6. Infinity Ward leads form new studio, take EA up on their offer. Sue Activision for lost royalties.
    7. Activision spends months trying to find a way to portray everything as some kind of giant conspiracy by their competitors to scuttle their most successful franchise, rather than accept that they brought everything on themselves.

  • djed #4 1 year ago

    @ubergine

    this is eurogamer, no usgamer, so we're not all lawyers here...

  • TheJuriel #5 1 year ago

    Oh, Activision... first you fire them, and then you stalk them? That's one abusive relationship, man.

  • ybfelix #6 1 year ago

    Morale of story: don't sell your studio.

    I started Blops and the very first level was graphically flat, ugly, a downgrade from MW2. I was irritated when learned about IW refusing to share techs with Treyarch despite itself being a wholly owned subsidiary of Acti. This petty and "insubordinate" attitude negatively affected us innocent customers.
    Edited by ybfelix at 22/12/10 @ 06:41

  • Doctor_What #7 1 year ago

    Acti: We've got loads of talented people leftm MW3 will be awesome!.... Except that EA stole our best people and now they owe us money... But MW3 will be awesome... But EA has critically damaged us... But MW3... But EA...

    You can't have it both ways Acti, either admit Infinity ward is buggered or say that EA haven't really shafted you. You can't claim both.

  • Phishfood #8 1 year ago

    Oh the nerd drama!

  • LudusSolers #9 1 year ago

    *gets popcorn*

  • Antaios #10 1 year ago

    "Challenge everything." Thanks for making me spray hot coffee from the nose, EG. :D

    Also: madness. "Happy christmas, EA. Signed: your pal Kotick."
    Edited by Antaios at 22/12/10 @ 07:02

  • MadCaddy13 #11 1 year ago

    Best case scenario.... Don't think their is one... Unless the A-team come along and crash the party, convincing the jury to give all the money to Africa.
    :)

  • ardamillo #12 1 year ago

    What an enormous waste of time and money

  • PlugMonkey #13 1 year ago

    The Call of Duty publisher alleged that EA began luring Jason West and Vince Zampella away from it in late July 2009, with COO John Schappert tapping the pair up via email.

    That's called 'head hunting'. Last time I checked, it wasn't illegal.

  • DrStrangelove #14 1 year ago

    Oh my. But nothing special in the Suenited States of America, I guess.

  • des #15 1 year ago

    lol lol lol

    poor EA

  • azazel_fallenangel #16 1 year ago

    Oh well, just think, this will make a cracking movie one day!!!

  • Segnit #17 1 year ago

    I think I'm gonna be a cheerleader for Activision on this one...





    I just kid Mr. Kotick. No offense.

  • des #18 1 year ago

    game about this would be nice

  • 3william56 #19 1 year ago

    Um... but as they're competitors, surely head hunting talented staff and legally interfering is exactly what they should be doing?

    Next up : Chelsea sues Man U for beating them at Footy...

  • Lotos8ter #20 1 year ago

    This is what the billion dollars that BlOps made is going to pay for - a field day for the lawyers. Acti aren't trying to dominate the opposition by making better games, they're simply trying to crush them in a court.

    I think I've bought my last Acti game.
    Greed. Pure, fucking greed.

  • des #21 1 year ago

    "That's called 'head hunting'. Last time I checked, it wasn't illegal."

    There is much more than that,go to joystiq and read

  • BuddyChrist #22 1 year ago

    @NegativeZero

    1000 points for being dead on

    *achievement unlocked* "It was me! I fired 'em"

  • SHPanda #23 1 year ago

    I don't understand this at all. If I get head hunted by a company from my job and I leave. It's fair game and no company gets sued by the other, it's a free Market and there's no time scales to contracts, they're open ended. This isn't football where a club has to buy a players registration and their contract is a finite length. Even if EA have "tapped them up" I don't see how Activision can sue them.

    Eitherway, I don't see Activision winning this, I think they're full of shit.

  • riceNpea #24 1 year ago

    let Judge Judy sort it out. it would make great telly and she would make Kotick look very stupid indeed

  • menage #25 1 year ago

    Well, I'm rooting for EA, at leats they put out software which doesn't suck balls.

  • TruWari3r #26 1 year ago

    detailed explanation of what's what

  • StooMonster #27 1 year ago

    I know it's a cliche, but the only winners here are the lawyers.

  • andywilkie35 #28 1 year ago

    Activision - still cunts

  • richarddavies #29 1 year ago

    If Aci are that pissed about the disruption on MW3 there suing for 400 million would it be fairly safe to assume we won't be seeing a cod this year?

  • Whitster #30 1 year ago

    After reading the full ins and outs of this it doesn't look anywhere near as clear cut as we thought it was before.

    Activision are guilty of many things, rinsing franchises to death, overpricing, having a CEO who seems to enjoy baiting his main customers, here however it may be that they actually are the victim of somekind of wrong doing themselves.

    Lets just hope they pull a jury that believes in Karma, eh?
    Edited by Whitster at 22/12/10 @ 09:35

  • actionfitz #31 1 year ago

    "Activision Publishing CEO Eric Hirshberg said earlier this week that there's "still a lot of talent" inside Infinity Ward despite the departures."

    aye that teaboy sure knows how to make a good cuppa!

  • The-Bodybuilder #32 1 year ago

    Tapping up competitor employees? Isn't that called "Headhunting"? (no reference to the awesome dreamcast game starring bearded hero Jack Wade).

  • PlugMonkey #33 1 year ago

    des
    "That's called 'head hunting'. Last time I checked, it wasn't illegal."

    There is much more than that,go to joystiq and read

    There's not very much more than that. Headhunting of some pissed off execs who were trying to see if there was a way out of their contract. And then a desperate attempt to tag corporate espionage on to the end of it, the majority of evidence for which is that the execs were pissed off and not playing nicely any more.

    I particularly like section E "The Fall of EA and The Rise Of Activision.". The whole of section F reads like a trashy pulp novel. "Unable to compete with Activision...Electronic Arts was determined to retaliate." and "EA's motive was clear!". It's fucking embarassing. All we need is a dame who's in trouble with a loan shark, and we can hand the whole thing over to Philip Marlowe.

  • Oh-Bollox #34 1 year ago

    tapping the pair up - not heard that phrase in years. Thanks EG, it's a classic.

  • Ranger101 #35 1 year ago

    @ubergine et al pointing to the joystiq article - the keyword is 'allegedly' - especialy considering the source of the information are Activision's lawyers who will obviously write a legal document painting the IW guys as arseholes.

  • TruWari3r #36 1 year ago

    @richarddavies "would it be fairly safe to assume we won't be seeing a cod this year? "

    There will be a new cod in 2011, one made by Sledgehammer which was setup a year or two ago by Michael Schofield. The co-creator of Dead Space and "mooched" from EA by activision.

    Rumor has it that it'll be a space cod.

  • des #37 1 year ago

    There is always a way out of contract.Ex IW bosses are not some saints,they are also full of shit.Their attitude towards fellow developer Treyarch shows what kind of people they are.But as usual,i expect that truth is somewhere in the middle.F section is lol,but true.I remember the times when EA was supposed to buy everyone and now the only big seller they have is Fifa(Europe only).

  • azazel_fallenangel #38 1 year ago

    @TruWari3r

    Hold on, so the new CoD will be made by a guy who Acti poached from EA?
    What, did Riccitiello and Kotick go to a party, put their keys in the bowl and wander off with each others partners?
    Acti are just upset they got the raw deal.

  • des #39 1 year ago

    "What, did Riccitiello and Kotick go to a party"

    Of course,they drink and eat together and then laugh at stupid minions that follow them.

  • Ged42 #40 1 year ago

    400 Million Dollars

    /Dr Evil pinkie finger

    I'd love to see how much the lawyers take of that, they must be licking their fangs in anticipation.

  • sanctusmortis #41 1 year ago

    @des hang on there, if I make an amazing product and want to keep my studio's integrity, and I created a line of games, I sure as Hell wouldn't be welcome to another team coming on, saying "we're making your franchise too", and wanting all our hard work handing over. Activision may be the money men, and they may own the trademark, but IW created COD. By your logic, all EA departments making shooters should just be allowed use of Frostbite without Dice's permission. The industry simply doesn't work like that.

  • hiddenranbir #42 1 year ago

    I loved the subtitle

    Challenge Everything!

  • des #43 1 year ago

    "if I make an amazing product and want to keep my studio's integrity"

    If you do that and sell full rights to Activision(or anyone) then you can forget about that product.Since 2003 those two were nothing more than Activision employees.As for Dice,EA can do whatever it wants with the engine,if they fully own them.

  • Stop-gap #44 1 year ago

    To the head-hunting/competition commenters - developers are made to sign no competition clauses as part of their contracts to stop them, for instance, taking all knowledge of Company A's engine technology with them and using it for Company B's benefit.
    When this Acti/IW business first started, I think the terms were revealed to last for 3 years, if memory serves. Acti can easily pursue Respawn with that legal angle.

  • PlugMonkey #45 1 year ago

    Stop-gap
    To the head-hunting/competition commenters - developers are made to sign no competition clauses as part of their contracts to stop them, for instance, taking all knowledge of Company A's engine technology with them and using it for Company B's benefit.
    When this Acti/IW business first started, I think the terms were revealed to last for 3 years, if memory serves. Acti can easily pursue Respawn with that legal angle.

    WRT stealing the source code, yes. If they can prove that, which I doubt. Everything else in a non-competition clause generally falls apart under pretty much any human rights bill present in the western world.

  • Stop-gap #46 1 year ago

    I thought it was more in keeping with protecting IP and the coding concepts rather than chunks of actual code, but yes, that would be massively difficult to prove to the point it would win a court case. Much more difficult than breaking of contract, which is where they seem to be going with this.
    That said, that liability would rest solely with the exIW guys and not something that EA can be sued/held responsible for, wouldn't it?
    edit- have human rights laws been used to get out of this kind of thing, or is that yet to be put to the test?
    Edited by Stop-gap at 22/12/10 @ 14:52

  • des #47 1 year ago

    If you people want a sad story in game dev click on this
    <a href=http://fractiv.com/"link">,scroll down
    Former Project Offset devs...
    Their tone speaks a lot about them.
    Edited by des at 22/12/10 @ 17:13

  • PlugMonkey #48 1 year ago

    @stop-gap

    I believe there was a test case in Europe a couple of years ago that determined that non-competition clauses infringed the individual's right to earn a living. It would be difficult for an American court to go the other way without basically saying American's have fewer rights than Europeans.

    Activision's case seems to be that EA deliberately sabotaged Call of Duty by doing something improper and illegal. Again, difficult to prove conclusively, and the damages seem wildly unlikely given CoD was and still is the most successful franchise in history.

    If West and Zampella aren't happy and want to court EA, I don't really see what Activision can do about it. Probably easier to try and keep your employees happy.