Several families of victims killed or injured in a 2022 school shooting in Uvalde, Texas, have sued Activision Blizzard for its alleged role in “eating alienated teenage boys and spitting out mass shooters,” according to the lawsuit filed in May 2024 was filed. the court has held the company responsible for allegedly promoting guns and violence against children, claiming 18-year-old gunman Salvador Ramos played Call of Duty “obsessively.” Activision Blizzard filed a response in late December invoking California’s anti-SLAPP statutes, which protect corporations’ “rights to creative expression.”
Activision Blizzard’s lawyers say in the response that the lawsuit is “the latest attempt to revive an old playbook, following claims made in lawsuits filed in the wake of Columbine and other violent crimes .” It cited several court cases ruling that “video game makers and distributors cannot be held legally responsible under the law for school shootings or other violent crimes.”
SLAPP stands for ‘strategic lawsuit against public participation’, and anti-SLAPP protections are used to “dismiss meritless lawsuits aimed at the legitimate exercise of the rights of fair speech, lawful petitions, and legal association,” according to Bloomberg Law. For example, a court granted an anti-SLAPP motion to file a negligence and liability complaint on video game addiction in 2014. That’s because courts and lawmakers previously agreed that video games should legally be treated as creative works covered by the First Amendment, and not as products.
“The cause of the plaintiffs’ injuries – both legally and morally – is the perpetrator’s violent attack. And if plaintiffs want to restrict artistic expression, they should look to the legislature, not the courts,” Activision wrote. “In this ‘latest episode in a long line of failed attempts to censor violent entertainment’ (id. at p. 804) there can be only one outcome: the charges must be dropped.”
In the 25-page response document and accompanying materials, Activision Blizzard argues why Call of Duty should be considered an artistic expression and more than just a product. Part of that argument is about the way in which games – and Call of Duty in particular – are a matter of public interest: “The games also tackle real-world issues – such as geopolitics, how technology affects war and the moral complexity of fighting – inspired by historical events, including the Russian intervention in the Syrian civil war and the attack on Benghazi in 2012.”
Activision says this is all done through creative and artistic, cinematic and literary means, while also looking to technology to drive immersion and realism – something that doesn’t strip it of First Amendment protections. “In any case, advanced technologies have only enhanced the artistry and creativity of video games – and made them more expressively converge with film and television – by transporting players to rich landscapes, rapidly evolving and engaging storylines, and dynamic battle scenes,” the lawyers said. participation. All Call of Duty games feature realistic weapon depictions, which Activision Blizzard says has “artistic relevance” to the franchise. Therefore, Activision Blizzard says, the plaintiffs have no basis for negligence or product liability claims. It also argues other claims, such as aiding and abetting. In addition to the arguments, several other documents were submitted, including a lengthy statement from Call of Duty creative director Patrick Kelly, proving this Call of Duty: Black Ops Cold War cost $700 million to develop, and one of University of Notre Dame media professor Thomas Paynewhich outlines the cultural history of Call of Duty and military games.
But attorney Katherine Mesner-Hage alleged in the original complaint that Activision, Meta (with Instagram) and gun manufacturer Daniel Defense are a “three-headed monster” that “knowingly exposed (Ramos) to the gun, conditioned him to see it as a tool to solve his problems and train him in its use.” It’s a conversation that occasionally surfaces around tragedies like the Uvalde shooting or about violence like the murder of UnitedHealthcare CEO Brian Thompson; With Thompson’s death, some media outlets pointed out Luigi Mangione’s history with video games as suspect Among usdespite a lack of evidence linking the murder to the social game.
The next hearing, on April 15, will decide whether the complaint is dismissed due to anti-SLAPP protections.