The Volokh Conspiracy
Mostly law professors | Sometimes contrarian | Often libertarian | Always independent
Runescape "Muting" Leads to First Amendment / Due Process Lawsuit Against Video Game Company
Unsurprisingly, the lawsuit goes nowhere.
From Elansari v. Jagex Inc., 2019 WL 3202195 (E.D. Pa. July 15), handed down by Judge Mark A. Kearney a mere 5 days after the Complaint was filed:
Amro Elansari sues a video gaming company located in the United Kingdom for allegedly "muting" him from playing his game. {[He alleges that] Jagex Inc. "operates public game open to public — free + membership" [quoting the Complaint]. Although his allegations are far from clear, Mr. Elansari alleges Jagex Inc. bans a player violating the rules of the game. He alleges Jagex Inc. "muted" him without explaining why and then denied his appeal of the decision without reasons.}
[Elansari] pro se alleges the video gaming company deprived him of due process, free speech and human rights…. He also moves for leave to proceed in forma pauperis. We grant Mr. Elansari leave to proceed in forma pauperis but dismiss his Complaint under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B)(ii).
Mr. Elansari … only alleges constitutional claims. He cannot state a constitutional claim against a private gaming company precluding him for amending to assert a federal question. As he does not assert a state law claim, we dismiss the case without prejudice for him to allege a potential state law claim against parties who may have diverse citizenship….
The hand-written complaint states that "Plaintiff is Streamer ← 2000 hours+ invested." I'm not a gaming expert, but I assume that the Jagex game involved is likely Runescape, which seems to be Jagex's main product.
Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of Reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Comments may only be edited within 5 minutes of posting. Report abuses.
Please
to post comments
[…] from Law https://reason.com/2019/07/17/runescape-muting-leads-to-first-amendment-due-process-lawsuit-against-… […]
If Josh Hawley got his way, Jagex would have settled.
Pro se plaintiffs doing pro se plaintiff things.
At least it didn't cost him anything.
Better yet, it seems not to have cost Jagex anything, since the judge dismissed the case on his own.
[…] By videogaming Runescape “Muting” Leads to First Amendment / Due Process Lawsuit Against Video Game Company Reason […]
I wonder if he might make a state law claim for breach of contract on the basis of promissory estoppel? His extensive investment of time in the game is arguably reliance, to his detriment if he as gratuitously cut off.
I think you'll find a waiver that covers this buried in the terms of service.
Of course, if he was cheating, then he loses because of unclean hands, anyway.
[…] Here’s a bit of a weird one: a First Amendment lawsuit over the “muting” of a player’s character. (h/t Volokh Conspiracy) […]
[…] *[http://services.runescape.com/m=forum/forums.ws?14,15,792,66112384 The Reaper Conspiracy] *[https://reason.com/2019/07/17/runescape-muting-leads-to-first-amendment-due-process-lawsuit-against-… This is not a Democracy] Find us on the web at: *[ […]