Epic Sues 14 year old for cheating in Fortnite

[hums005]

https://www.theverge.com/2018/5/9/17333292/fortnite-cheater-lawsuit

 

Defendant is a cheater,” said Epic Games in its October 2017 lawsuit against a 14-year-old boy. “Nobody likes a cheater. And nobody likes playing with cheaters.”

 

C.R. is being sued for live-streaming himself using a cheat he found online and then linking out to it in the YouTube description box. Epic Games doesn’t claim that defendant created cheat, sold a cheat, or even run a forum that distributes cheats. They are just discouraging streamers who use Cheat codes and Patches to attract followers because allowing such a trend will make the cheats spread like wildfire and cause a MiniMilitia 2 situation where the public lobbies were swarmed by "self crowned hacker" end users which quickly made casual gamers who were genuinely playing the game abiding to the rules and regulations of the game.

 

Quoting Verge "The lawsuit gives a few examples of what Fortnite cheats can do. “A cheat might enable the cheater to see through solid objects, teleport, impersonate another player by ‘spoofing’ that player’s user name, or make moves other players cannot, such as a spin followed by an instant headshot to another player.” It’s not clear what kind of cheat C.R. was using, but whatever it was, it was giving him a huge leg up in Fortnite’s Battle Royale mode, which pits up to 100 players against each other on a map."

 

It is not clear if the workaround or fix to the cheat is already in place or not. but it seems Epic games is going through with the case.

 

Verge says 

"It was probably this counter-notice that kicked off the unlikely lawsuit to begin with. The way that DMCA counter-notices work is that YouTube will keep the content offline for 10 days, but if the copyright claimant — in this case, Epic Games — files a legal action, YouTube has to continue to keep it offline. And that’s exactly what Epic Games did, before even realizing they were going after a 14-year-old.

 

That fact only came to their attention when C.R.’s mother, Lauren Rogers, sent a letter to the court, pointing out that C.R. was a minor and minors are not capable of consenting to contracts. She had never authorized him to play Fortnite, which meant that the EULA was not binding on her son.

 

Lauren Rogers isn’t wrong, per se. It’s true that, in general, minors do not have the capacity to make contracts. (It’s why standard EULAs like Fortnite’s ask minors to only use the service with the supervision of their parent or guardian, who must themselves agree to the EULA.)

 

 

By playing Fortnite without his mother’s permission, technically speaking, C.R. is outside of the EULA. But also technically speaking, playing Fortnite without being covered under the EULA might be a digital trespass, or worse, computer fraud and abuse. That might sound wild and ridiculous in a world where minors are almost certainly clicking through EULAs without their parents’ permission, but the whole underage internet exists on the precarious legal fiction that all these teens are being supervised by their parents, who are bound by these contracts that no one is actually reading.

But all this is a little beside the point. Being a minor can’t stop you from getting sued for copyright infringement."

[TheSLSAMG]

Epic Games wants to have a shit-show it seems.

 

I'm fine with discouraging people from cheating but an IP and HWID ban would probably be enough, even if he was promoting a hack tool.

[dizmo]

Can you even sue a 14 year old? That doesn't sound legal to me.

[Brooksie359]

1 minute ago, dizmo said:

Can you even sue a 14 year old? That doesn't sound legal to me.

I mean you can sue them for damages just like anyone else. 

[hums005]

Just now, Brooksie359 said:

I mean you can sue them for damages just like anyone else. 

read to the end. Appearently the parents are arguing that the EULA 14 yo agreed to isnt legally binding. And the mother says she haven't given the kid permission to play that game. i mean what kind of argument is that?? like she didn't know he was streaming games online let alone playing it. 

[ARikozuM]

Hopefully this sets off the precedent that a EULA is not legally-binding nor usable in any form. Hell, I think EA's EULA for Battlefield 3 had a clause about the "purchaser" not "owning the software" and that EA could "terminate the agreement at their discretion". 

 

Seriously? If you purchase a game, EA can ban from on-line (no problems with that), but shouldn't take away access to the entire program (i.e. single-player). 

[hums005]

7 minutes ago, TheSLSAMG said:

Epic Games wants to have a shit-show it seems.

 

I'm fine with discouraging people from cheating but an IP and HWID ban would probably be enough, even if he was promoting a hack tool.

it seems when they initiated the lawsuit they were unaware the defendant is a 14yo. and by the way the kid and their parents are lawyering up, this is gonna define some new/modded laws and some major changes in EULAs across the Gaming, Live streaming and Video sharing platforms.

[Phentos]

6 minutes ago, hums005 said:

read to the end. Appearently the parents are arguing that the EULA 14 yo agreed to isnt legally binding. And the mother says she haven't given the kid permission to play that game. i mean what kind of argument is that?? like she didn't know he was streaming games online let alone playing it. 

Agreed. Her whole position seems like hearsay. A just punishment IMO is to issue the kid permanent IP and hardware bans and go after the parents to recoup legal costs.

 

I'm siding with Epic on this even though I dislike Fortnite.

[Brooksie359]

3 minutes ago, hums005 said:

read to the end. Appearently the parents are arguing that the EULA 14 yo agreed to isnt legally binding. And the mother says she haven't given the kid permission to play that game. i mean what kind of argument is that?? like she didn't know he was streaming games online let alone playing it. 

My mom is a lawyer and she says that almost all digital agreements have terms that aren't enforceable. Signing an agreement isn't an end all be all. If the agreement has terms that are against consumer protection laws then it can't be enforced.

[hums005]

Just now, Phentos said:

Agreed. Her whole position seems like hearsay.

 

A just punishment is to issue the kid permanent IP and hardware bans and sue the parents to recoup legal costs. I'm siding with Epic on this even though I dislike Fortnite.

Any purist gaming fan would. most of us have mixed feeling about users being able to buy weapons and loot crates with cash rather than levelling up and earning them like we used to. cheats and cheaters should be discouraged. 

[hums005]

Just now, Brooksie359 said:

My mom is a lawyer and she says that almost all digital agreements have terms that aren't enforceable. Signing an agreement isn't an end all be all. If the agreement has terms that are against consumer protection laws then it can't be enforced.

Ask her what she would say if she was defending epic. I bet she would have an epic law point or reply to that

[Phentos]

4 minutes ago, Brooksie359 said:

My mom is a lawyer and she says that almost all digital agreements have terms that aren't enforceable. Signing an agreement isn't an end all be all. If the agreement has terms that are against consumer protection laws then it can't be enforced.

Depends on the jurisdiction.

[Ryujin2003]

10 minutes ago, hums005 said:

read to the end. Appearently the parents are arguing that the EULA 14 yo agreed to isnt legally binding. And the mother says she haven't given the kid permission to play that game. i mean what kind of argument is that?? like she didn't know he was streaming games online let alone playing it. 

If he's American, electronic age of consent is 13... So... Too late?

 

And parents can't argue they didn't know. That's their fucking responsibility as parents. I'd be damned if I let my kid play a game I have no knowledge about. Yeah, it might help that I'm at techie, but it's not an excuse to refuse to be involved in your child's hobbies and interests... and online activities.

[ARikozuM]

I just realized that this sounds like a case from a few months ago? 

 

Unless I'm clairvoyant... Nope, still can't figure what women want.

[Arika]

kid should be punished. not sure if they can "sue" him though. though it's likely they filed the lawsuit prior to them knowing the kid was 14.

 

this case will do one of two things. scare the kid half to death and will never consider cheating again.

or

will make the kid think he cant be touched and do it even more.

[Phentos]

1 minute ago, Sierra Fox said:

kid should be punished. not sure if they can "sue" him though. though it's likely they filed the lawsuit prior to them knowing the kid was 14.

 

this case will do one of two things. scare the kid half to death and will never consider cheating again.

or

will make the kid think he cant be touched and do it even more.

I'll bet the second is more likely, considering the kid didn't care one bit about his cheating and the ramifications of it. And his mother sounds like a tool.

 

He'll go far in life... /s

[mr moose]

Parents need to be careful playing with this sort of defense. It has the potential set a precedent that holds all parents legally responsible for their kids actions on line. 

[dizmo]

25 minutes ago, Brooksie359 said:

I mean you can sue them for damages just like anyone else. 

I really don't believe that's the case. Not only that, suing a minor nets no monetary gain. So what's the point?

[dizmo]

12 minutes ago, Ryujin2003 said:

If he's American, electronic age of consent is 13... So... Too late?

 

And parents can't argue they didn't know. That's their fucking responsibility as parents. I'd be damned if I let my kid play a game I have no knowledge about. Yeah, it might help that I'm at techie, but it's not an excuse to refuse to be involved in your child's hobbies and interests... and online activities.

Just because you know he plays the game, doesn't mean you know he's cheating in it. Those are two different things.

[Jurrunio]

I dont think the kid can be sued, but he's probably not getting any access to the internet for weeks.

 

Seriously, why are people so stupid? They know cheating is against the rules, but rather than keeping it to themselves they openly show it.

[Spotty]

There were 2 cheaters who Epic took legal action against at around the same time, with the other cheater opting to settle the matter. All the settlement involved was the cheater just had to agree to delete the cheat software, never create or distribute any software that modifies Epic's property, and never cheat in any game made by Epic.

Quote

Epic Games and Charles Vraspir have settled a lawsuit related to cheating in the game Fortnite: Battle Royale. Vraspir has agreed to destroy the software used to circumvent the rules of the game and to never cheat at any of Epic’s products ever again.

_{https://www.polygon.com/2017/12/6/16741978/epic-fortnite-cheater-settlement-vraspir-dmca}

Why is his family continuing on with the legal action? This should have been solved months ago by settling and agreeing to not cheat, and the boys mother taking away his computer/console and giving him a spanking. Instead they're fighting it? Why?

His youtube video complaining about Epic Games suing him for cheating is commentary over the top of a video of him cheating in GTA Online. This kid isn't too bright.
 

[Taf the Ghost]

38 minutes ago, hums005 said:

read to the end. Appearently the parents are arguing that the EULA 14 yo agreed to isnt legally binding. And the mother says she haven't given the kid permission to play that game. i mean what kind of argument is that?? like she didn't know he was streaming games online let alone playing it. 

Actually, a quite valid one. EULAs are normally hard to actually enforce and liability for minors depends on State Laws.

[8uhbbhu8]

Didn't something similar to this happen a few years ago too?

[hums005]

34 minutes ago, Sierra Fox said:

kid should be punished. not sure if they can "sue" him though. though it's likely they filed the lawsuit prior to them knowing the kid was 14.

 

this case will do one of two things. scare the kid half to death and will never consider cheating again.

or

will make the kid think he cant be touched and do it even more.

atleast till he is 18 and can be held accountable for his actions on and offline, he is protected by the law and preconception that kids and teenagers are idiots and dont have the sufficient thinking ability to choose right and wrong. Which is absolute nonsense ofcourse.

[hums005]

28 minutes ago, dizmo said:

Just because you know he plays the game, doesn't mean you know he's cheating in it. Those are two different things.

The mother is saying as she didn't consent to her kid to play the game, he shouldn't be accountable as per EULA, which makes it the same thing. she admits her son is playing it and probably have cheated but is saying isn't his fault or he cant be touched as EPIC didn't personally go to her door and asked her permission to let her child play with the other kids in the block like YouTube did when he wanted to stream his game play online. All the other game creators apparently asked the lady personally to let her son play and they came bearing gifts