The gaming platform Roblox Corp. is seeking dismissal of multiple lawsuits brought by plaintiffs who allege addiction and personality changes among their children due to the company’s failure to warn users of such potential complications.
In papers filed with Los Angeles Superior Court Judge Lawrence Riff, who held a brief conference on the cases Friday, Roblox attorneys contend that the plaintiffs’ suits violate the platform’s right to free speech.
“Plaintiffs’ attempts to constrain the publication and distribution of expressive works fails as a matter of law,” according to the Roblox anti-SLAPP (Strategic Lawsuit Against Public Participation) motion, which adds that it is “well-established that video games are creative works entitled to First Amendment protection.”
The state’s anti-SLAPP law is intended to prevent people from using courts, and potential threats of a lawsuit, to intimidate those who are exercising their First Amendment rights.
The families also have not sufficiently explained how Roblox’s conduct caused their minors’ alleged injuries, the Roblox lawyers further contend in their pleadings.
The Roblox lawyers cite the allegations of three of the plaintiffs. In one, a mother says her child uses the platform five to eight hours daily in a “compulsive and disordered” manner and that the child’s alleged addiction arose from playing Minecraft and unidentified games available on the Roblox platform on a personal computer and on gaming consoles such as Xbox One.
Another mother says her 12-year-old child’s alleged addiction began with unidentified games available on the Roblox platform which the child began accessing on Xbox at age 8. She says the child continues using the products “at an increasing, uncontrollable, compulsive, and/or addictive pace.”
The third mother cited by the Roblox lawyers is a parent of the original plaintiff and contends that her child began playing video games as a pre-teen, used the Roblox platform as well as Fortnite and Minecraft and remains addicted at age 15. The suit contends the games have been marketed to minors without implementing adequate parental controls, warnings or opt-in limits on time minors can spend on the games.
The suit further states that the litigation “is not a war on fun” and does not have a goal of “curtailing the creation and enjoyment of entertaining video games,” but instead means to hold companies accountable for not advising users of addiction issues that have long been associated with game playing.
The Roblox lawyers state that the three plaintiffs and the others suing are claiming liability based on an alleged failure to warn users of the harmful nature of playing the games and, secondly, that Roblox facilitates the creation of games and makes those games available for users such as the minor plaintiffs to access and play.
However, the only way Roblox “could even attempt to comply with a purported duty to label addictive gaming products or warn or inform the public of their risks would be to monitor every user-generated game to try to decide which ones might be addictive to some users or contain allegedly addictive content,” according to the Roblox lawyers’ court papers.
In any event, all of the plaintiffs’ claims against Roblox “fall squarely within … the anti-SLAPP statute,” according to the Roblox attorneys’ court papers.
Roblox has filed an additional dismissal motion in case the anti-SLAPP motion is denied and it challenges the sufficiency of the facts in the complaint. Co-defendants Microsoft Corp. and Sony Interactive Entertainment LLC have filed similar motions.