Court Denies Illustrator’s Right to Share of Video Game Profits

On December 18th, 2015, the Superior Court of Quebec (Court) released its decision in Seggie c Roofdog Games Inc, 2015 QCCS 6462, refusing to award 50% of the profits from successful online games “Extreme Roadtrip” and “Extreme Roadtrip 2” to the plaintiff (Seggie), an illustrator of artwork used in the games. 

Seggie provided illustrations to the defendant video game company, Roofdog Games Inc (Roofdog) for the game Extreme Roadtrip.  Seggie repeatedly acknowledged that Roofdog would be unable to pay for the work and stated that his work was “pro-bono”.  After Roofdog launched the sequel, Extreme Roadtrip 2, Seggie commenced this action against Roofdog and its directing mind, Germain Guillaume, seeking 50% of the profits from the games.  Roofdog and Guillaume counterclaimed for defamation and for reimbursement of legal fees for abuse of process.

The copyright issues facing the Court were whether, as a result of contributing his illustrations, Seggie was a co-author of the resulting video games, and whether Roofdog and Guillaume had permission to use the images.  The Court found that the video games were not works of co-authorship based on a number of factors, including the lack of intention to co-author, the lack of shared risk in the enterprise, and the relative importance of the parties’ contributions to the works.  The Court also found that through his communications with Roofdog and Guillaume, Seggie effectively consented to use of his illustrations in the games.

Due to some ambiguity regarding Seggie’s understanding he would be paid for his work, the Court ordered Roofdog to pay Seggie $10,000.  However, Guillaume was successful in his counterclaim with the Court finding elements of the litigation and comments made by Seggie to be “unacceptable and offending”.  Seggie was ordered to pay Guillaume $17,000 in damages and $5,000 in punitive damages.