Activision Blizzard Sued by Pro Players

Allegations of Anti-Competitive Practices from Activision Blizzard Rock the Esports Industry

Activision Blizzard finds itself embroiled in legal turmoil as two prominent pro players, Hector “H3CZ” Rodriguez and Seth “Scump” Abner, file a lawsuit against the gaming giant, accusing the Call of Duty League of operating as an unlawful monopoly. The lawsuit, seeking an astounding $680 million in damages, alleges that the league’s monopolistic practices stifle competition, impose unjust financial burdens on players and teams, and restrict their ability to seek alternative revenue streams.

Rodriguez, renowned as the president of Optic Gaming, and Abner, recognized as one of the most successful players in Call of Duty history, contend that their involvement in the league has been marred by coercive tactics and exorbitant financial demands imposed by Activision Blizzard. Rodriguez, in particular, recounts his ordeal of being compelled into a financially ruinous partnership with billionaire investors to secure a coveted spot within the Call of Duty League’s exclusive roster of 12 teams.

The lawsuit, filed in federal court, sheds light on the league’s transformation following Activision’s acquisition of Major League Gaming, consolidating control over professional Call of Duty tournaments and effectively eradicating competition from independent organizers. According to the plaintiffs, Activision’s stranglehold over the esports landscape has been wielded like a “virtual nuclear weapon,” depriving players of bargaining power and subjecting them to draconian terms that favor the corporation’s financial interests.

Call of Duty Microsoft

Central to the controversy is the absence of a collective bargaining agreement between players and team owners, a hallmark of traditional sports leagues, compounded by Activision’s ownership of the game itself. This enables the corporation to dictate revenue-sharing terms, command hefty entry fees from teams, and restrict players from monetizing their gameplay through platforms like Twitch or YouTube.

Furthermore, the lawsuit underscores the disparity in revenue distribution, with Activision reaping substantial profits while players and teams shoulder the brunt of financial risks and restrictions on potential earnings. The plaintiffs argue that this lopsided arrangement has perpetuated a cycle of exploitation, compelling participants to either acquiesce to oppressive terms or face exclusion from the market altogether.

Despite facing significant backlash over its alleged anti-competitive practices, Activision Blizzard remains steadfast in its defense, dismissing the lawsuit as baseless and pledging to vigorously contest the claims. However, with the recent turmoil within the company’s esports division and the demise of the Overwatch League, the lawsuit casts a shadow of uncertainty over the future of the Call of Duty League, underscoring the profound impact of legal battles on the esports landscape.