Aviator LLC Explains Trademark Origins in Dispute with Adjarabet and Spribe

Enrique EscrivaAuthor

Wrote by

Updated 3 days ago ( 2 min. read )

In a statement, the company’s legal representative, Nikoloz Gogilidze from Mikadze Gegetchkori Taktakishvili, provided an overview of the history behind the Aviator trademark, which is central to the ongoing legal conflict.

According to the statement, the Aviator name and logo were originally conceived by Georgian businessman Teimuraz Ugulava during 2016-2017. In 2018, City Loft, a company fully owned by Ugulava, officially registered the trademark with the Georgian State Trademark Agency.

Initially, the Aviator logo was used for a land-based casino, but it later became associated with the Aviator crash game, which launched on the Adjarabet platform in January 2019, while Ugulava was still the owner of the company. However, when Adjarabet was acquired by Flutter Entertainment in 2019, the Aviator trademark rights were not included in the deal. Despite this, Adjarabet and Spribe continued using the Aviator logo on their platforms in Georgia and Armenia until January 2024.

Spribe, which had collaborated in the development of the game, also made minor changes to the logo and began using it internationally. In 2022, all intellectual property related to the Aviator trademark was transferred from City Loft to Aviator. Following this transfer, Aviator initiated legal proceedings to invalidate Spribe's use of the altered logo, which had been registered in both Georgia and the European Union.

Spribe and Flutter's Defense of Ownership

In response to these legal actions, both Spribe and Flutter Entertainment have publicly defended their use of the Aviator game and logo. Spribe asserts that it is the original creator of the Aviator game and claims international intellectual property rights to both the game and its logo. Similarly, Flutter Entertainment has contested the Georgian court’s ruling, labeling the damages as excessive and confirming plans to appeal.

As the legal battle unfolds, this case underscores the complexities of intellectual property disputes in the gaming industry, especially when multiple stakeholders are involved in the development and marketing of a product across various jurisdictions.

Background image