Langdell claims nearly 100 errors in Edge vs Future High Court ruling

The undaunted Tim Langdell has claimed a High Court ruling dismissing his trademark claims against Future was riddled with errors.

Despite Future's claims to the contrary, Langdell reiterated to Eurogamer that he has filed a "noteworthy" appeal against the result of the suit between the two companies.

Langdell claims to have identified a huge number of discrepancies in the court's decision in Future's favour

"The overall impression is that the judge could not be bothered to look at Edge's evidence since it must surely (hopefully) be unprecedented for a judge to make almost 100 errors of fact and law in a Judgment and Order, where the errors can be easily cross-checked by anyone," a statement said.

"The sheer number of objectively verifiable errors by the Judge is one reason Edge is confident of prevailing on appeal."

The case included a notable incident in which Langdell appeared either to have perjured himself or made some astounding mistakes over evidence presented on a floppy disk. Edge Games accused Future of deliberately confusing matters to bring this impression about.

"Dr Langdell did not say anything untruthful at trial or in any of his witness statements," it claimed.

"Future successfully got the judge confused so that she only thought certain things he had said had been shown untrue when they were not."

Langdell had previously told Eurogamer that English High Court's ruling in Future's favour. Future responded by stating it had not been notified of any such action, and had been given the go ahead to pursue Langdell for contempt of court.

The whole messy business began over a trademark tussle between Langdell's Edge Games and ... just about everyone, actually, including EA and Mobage, but most recently Future, publisher of venerable trade mag EDGE.