Dream Games of Az v. Pc Onsite

Good Law
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitApril 2, 200907-15847California6,402 words

Opinion

Opinion

I. FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND

Dream Games, a corporation that creates, designs, devel- ops, licenses, and sells electronic video bingo games, devel- oped an electronic video game called Fast Action Bingo. In March 2002, Dream Games entered negotiations with PC Onsite, a company that licenses, distributes, and sells com- puter hardware and software, regarding the possibility of PC Onsite performing software upgrade work on Fast Action Bingo. When PC Onsite was given the original source code for Fast Action Bingo, the two companies signed a third party source code nondisclosure agreement, which listed Dream Games as the licensor and PC Onsite as the licensee, and pro- vided that Dream Games would retain all intellectual property rights in the proprietary information provided to PC Onsite. The agreement prohibited PC Onsite from assigning, selling, distributing, licensing, or otherwise transferring the propri- etary information.

PC Onsite created a new version of Fast Action Bingo, cal- led “Fast Action Bingo II.” In a September 2002 meeting 3994 DREAM GAMES OF ARIZONA v. PC ONSITE attended by PC Onsite representatives Casey Hagon, presi- dent, and Garland Pierce,…

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.