A novel lawsuit is set to put the spotlight on a publisher’s legal control over competitions involving its games. On the dock is Activision Blizzard Inc., accused of unlawfully exploiting its monopoly over the Call of Duty video game. If the lawsuit succeeds, it could alter the power dynamics in the esports industry, transferring more authority to players and teams keen on profiting from an industry projected to reach $4.3 billion this year, according to Statista.
The lawsuit is unique in that it is the first time players are suing a publisher claiming it has an illegal monopoly over a single game, according to John Holden, an associate professor at Oklahoma State University.
Deserving attention is the intersection of competition law and the Copyright Act, which grants firms like Activision, now owned by Microsoft Corp., protection for original works.
The suit raises questions about how traditional sports are distinct from esports. As Maureen Weston, professor at the Pepperdine University Caruso School of Law explains, “In pickleball, no one owns the ball and the racket. In esports, the publishers create that specific piece of the game, which is intellectual property.”
Activision, a prolific video game product developer that Microsoft purchased last year in a $69 billion deal, may witness a reduction in its market power if the lawsuit swings in the players’ favor. Meanwhile, a victory for the players could also impact the licensing aspects of various electronics, contends Holden.
A similar issue had surfaced in fantasy sports when a producer of fantasy major league baseball games argued that player names and statistics were public domain information and, thus, could be used freely. Whether the same principle could extend to video games remains to be seen.
As the lawsuit progresses, the legal community and esports industry will be keenly observing the fallout – if the monopoly over Call of Duty is indeed lawful, and consequently, whether there exists a market exclusively for professional Call of Duty competitions.
The article originally appeared on Bloomberg Law.