![Electronic Arts (EA) headquarters](https://www.sportico.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/06/GettyImages-1478149421-e1688157353736.jpg?w=1280&h=720&crop=1)
Electronic Arts was aiming for a swift “game over” in The Brandr Group’s lawsuit against the video game publisher.
It scored an initial victory on Friday as a federal judge in California denied Brandr’s petition for a temporary restraining order and appeared skeptical of the overarching case. Judge Haywood Gilliam, stressing that such an order is an “extraordinary remedy,” found the NIL agency fell short of the high threshold.
Gilliam stressed that there is not, as required for a restraining order, a threat of any immediate harm to Brandr. EA noted it has not reached out to college athletes or signed any, and that the rosters the game will draw from won’t be known until next year.
The judge also underscored how Brandr has not shown a risk of irreparable harm, which refers to a type of harm that monetary damages can’t remedy. “The Court finds that Plaintiff’s alleged injuries are monetarily compensable and otherwise speculative,” Gilliam observed, adding that Brandr “provides little explanation as to why—even if true—any resulting harm is irreparable.” To that point, the judge concluded Brandr “can estimate the fair market value for using the NILs in the game, as well as the amount of money.”
Gilliam added other critiques to Brandr’s petition, including “there is simply no evidence in the record that the value of the students’ NILs would be diminished by their use in the game.” He also opined that Brandr hasn’t explained “why provisions about group licensing programs” would be implicated by EA signing separate licensing agreements with athletes and schools.
To be clear, Gilliam’s ruling does not end the litigation and the merits of the case remain to be determined. However, it does end the risk of a judicial order that would delay EA game’s development in the near term.