Varga

Varga v. Twitch Interactive CA1/1

Good Law
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaJuly 17, 2024A166747California9,565 words

Opinion

Opinion

Wilson, J.

I. BACKGROUND

We summarize the facts in the light most favorable to the judgment. (Roby v. McKesson Corp. (2009) 47 Cal.4th 686, 693–694.) A. The Parties’ Agreement Twitch is a video livestreaming service that provides gaming-related content. Varga is a popular live streamer (or “streamer”) who initially broadcasted himself playing video games on a different platform. In 2012, when Twitch was still a new company, it recruited Varga to livestream as a partner. They entered into a “Content License and Base Network Agreement” (Agreement or Partnership Agreement), whereby Varga agreed to create video gaming-related content and grant Twitch an exclusive license to use that content in exchange for the right to access Twitch’s media player and receive certain forms of revenue. The Agreement was for two years and would renew automatically for subsequent one-year terms unless either party provided 90 days’ written notice prior to the end of the term. The Agreement prohibited Varga from streaming content that was “unlawful, libelous, defamatory, pornographic or obscene,” or that otherwise violated the “Content Guidelines” attached to the Agreement. The Content Guidelines listed “Prohibited…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.