logo
Lawyer argues Call of Duty maker can't be held responsible for actions of Uvalde, Texas, shooter

Lawyer argues Call of Duty maker can't be held responsible for actions of Uvalde, Texas, shooter

First Post3 days ago
Three sets of parents who lost children in the shooting were in the audience at the Los Angeles hearing. read more
A lawyer for the maker of the video game Call of Duty argued Friday that a judge should dismiss a lawsuit brought by families of the victims of the Robb Elementary School attack in Uvalde, Texas, saying the contents of the war game are protected by the First Amendment.
The families sued Call of Duty maker Activision and Meta Platforms, which owns Instagram, saying that the companies bear responsibility for promoting products used by the teen gunman.
STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD
Three sets of parents who lost children in the shooting were in the audience at the Los Angeles hearing.
Activision lawyer Bethany Kristovich told Superior Court Judge William Highberger that the 'First Amendment bars their claims, period full stop.'
'The issues of gun violence are incredibly difficult,' Kristovich said. 'The evidence in this case is not.'
She argued that the case has little chance of prevailing if it continues, because courts have repeatedly held that 'creators of artistic works, whether they be books, music, movies, TV or video games, cannot be held legally liable for the acts of their audience.'
The lawsuit, one of many involving Uvalde families, was filed last year on the second anniversary of one of the deadliest school shootings in U.S. history. The gunman killed 19 students and two teachers. Officers finally confronted and shot him after waiting more than an hour to enter the fourth-grade classroom.
Kimberly Rubio, whose 10-year-old daughter Lexi was killed in the shooting, was among the parents who came from Texas to Southern California, where Activision is based, for the hearing.
'We travelled all this way, so we need answers,' Rubio said outside the courthouse. 'It's our hope that the case will move forward so we can get those answers.'
STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD
An attorney for the families argued during the hearing that Call of Duty exceeds its First Amendment protections by moving into marketing.
'The basis of our complaint is not the existence of Call of Duty,' Katie Mesner-Hage told the judge. 'It is using Call of Duty as a platform to market weapons to minors.'
The plaintiffs' lawyers showed contracts and correspondence between executives at Activison and gunmakers whose products, they said, are clearly and exactly depicted in the game despite brand names not appearing.
Mesner-Hage said the documents show that they actually prefer being unlabeled because 'it helps shield them from the implication that they are marketing guns to minors,' while knowing that players will still identify and seek out the weapons.
Kristovich said there is no evidence that the kind of product placement and marketing the plaintiffs are talking about happened in any of the editions of the game the shooter played.
The families have also filed a lawsuit against Daniel Defense, which manufactured the AR-style rifle used in the May 24, 2022, shooting. Koskoff argued that a replica of the rifle clearly appears on a splash page for Call of Duty.
STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD
Josh Koskoff, the families' Connecticut-based lead attorney, also represented families of nine Sandy Hook Elementary School shooting victims in a lawsuit against gunmaker Remington and got a $73 million lawsuit settlement.
He invoked Sandy Hook several times in his arguments, saying the shooters there and in Uvalde shared the same gaming obsession.
Koskoff said the Uvalde shooter experienced 'the absorption and the loss of self in Call of Duty.'
He said that immersion was so deep that the shooter searched online for how to obtain an armored suit that he didn't know only exists in the game.
Video game is 'in a class of its own,' lawyer says
Koskoff played a clip from Call of Duty Modern Warfare, the game the shooter played, with a first-person shooter gunning down opponents.
The shots echoed loudly in the courtroom, and several people in the audience slowly shook their heads.
'Call of Duty is in a class of its own,' Koskoff said.
STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD
Kristovich argued for Activision that the game, despite its vast numbers of players, can be tied to only a few of the many U.S. mass shootings.
'The game is incredibly common. It appears in a scene on 'The Office,'' she said. She added that it is ridiculous to assert that 'this is such a horrible scourge that your honor has to essentially ban it through this lawsuit.'
Highberger told the lawyers he was not leaning in either direction before the hearing. He gave no time frame for when he will rule, but a quick decision is not expected.
The judge did tell the plaintiffs' lawyers that their description of Activision's actions seemed like deliberate malfeasance, where their lawsuit alleges negligence. He said that was the biggest hurdle they needed to clear.
'Their conduct created a risk of exactly what happened,' Mesner-Hage told him. 'And we represent the people who are exactly the foreseeable victims of that conduct.'
STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD
Meta's attorneys will make arguments on a similar motion next month.
Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

‘Release Epstein files': Martin Luther King's family as 6,000 documents on him branded ‘distraction'
‘Release Epstein files': Martin Luther King's family as 6,000 documents on him branded ‘distraction'

Indian Express

time21 hours ago

  • Indian Express

‘Release Epstein files': Martin Luther King's family as 6,000 documents on him branded ‘distraction'

More than half a century after the assassination of Dr Martin Luther King Jr, the US government has released over 6,000 documents – nearly a quarter-million pages – related to his killing. They were posted, without warning, to the National Archives website late Monday. The Trump administration heralded the move as a victory for transparency. But to many civil rights historians and King's surviving family, the release was something else entirely: a distraction. 'This is a desperate attempt to distract,' said civil rights leader Rev. Al Sharpton, pointing to the storm of public pressure on the Trump administration to release files related to the death of Jeffrey Epstein. Sharpton accused the White House of using the King files 'to draw attention away from the firestorm engulfing Trump over the Epstein files and the public unraveling of his credibility.' King's daughter, Bernice King, echoed that sentiment. Hours after the documents went live, she posted a photo of her father on X with a sharp caption: 'Now, do the Epstein files.' If the release was meant to be a political manoeuvre, its substance didn't match its fanfare. Despite the volume, there is little in the newly released trove that offers fresh insight into the 1968 assassination of America's most prominent civil rights leader. Most of the material, aging reports, FBI memos, clippings, and tips, has either been released before or adds little to what is already publicly known. 'I saw nothing that struck me as new,' David Garrow, the Pulitzer Prize-winning biographer of Dr. King and chronicler of the FBI's campaign against him told The New York Times. What the files do contain are fragments of an exhaustive manhunt: interviews with people who knew King's killer, James Earl Ray; documentation of Ray's bizarre personal life—his interest in locksmithing, dance classes, and Bond-style aliases; and accounts of tips phoned in by the public in the chaotic weeks after the shooting. The government has long maintained that James Earl Ray acted alone. Ray, a career criminal who escaped from Missouri State Penitentiary a year before the assassination, pleaded guilty in 1969 but soon recanted, claiming he was part of a broader conspiracy. Allegations of official complicity have persisted ever since, pointing to the FBI, Memphis police, and even foreign intelligence services. But the newly released material does little to address or settle those claims. Missing from this release are the FBI wiretap recordings of Dr King, part of the bureau's extensive surveillance campaign aimed at discrediting him. Those remain sealed under court order until 2027. In the 1960s, the FBI sought to expose King's personal life, especially his alleged extramarital affairs, in an attempt to destroy his credibility and halt the momentum of the civil rights movement. Martin Luther King III and Bernice King issued a joint statement Monday, urging the public to consider the files in light of their father's legacy. 'He was relentlessly targeted by an invasive, predatory, and deeply disturbing disinformation and surveillance campaign,' they wrote. 'We ask those who engage with the release of these files to do so with empathy, restraint and respect for our family's continuing grief.'

Asim Munir wants himself as president, brother-in-law as PM: Ex-Pakistan army officer
Asim Munir wants himself as president, brother-in-law as PM: Ex-Pakistan army officer

First Post

timea day ago

  • First Post

Asim Munir wants himself as president, brother-in-law as PM: Ex-Pakistan army officer

Major (Retd) Adil Raja, a former Pakistani army officer, alleged that Army Chief General Asim Munir sought total control of the South Asian nation by orchestrating chaos read more A man carries a portrait of Pakistani army chief Field Marshal Syed Asim Munir, during a rally to express solidarity with Pakistan's armed forces, in Islamabad. AFP Major (Retd) Adil Raja, a former Pakistani army officer turned whistleblower, has accused Pakistan's army chief, General Asim Munir, of undermining the country's democracy. Raja alleged that Munir, who earlier promoted himself to the rank of Field Marshal, seeks total control by orchestrating chaos. 'The plan is allegedly by the Army Chief, Asim Munir — putting his brother-in-law as PM, himself or another general as president — a Musharraf-style accountability push to claim they cleaned up Pakistan,' he claimed, referencing the former Pakistani president and army chief. STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD In an India Today interview, Raja accused Munir of orchestrating a 'strategic lawsuit against public participation' (SLAPP)—a defamation case filed in the UK by Brigadier Rashid Nasir, the ISI's Punjab sector commander. 'This is part of the lawfare launched against me by the Pakistani military establishment and its intelligence arm, the ISI, with whom I was once working,' Raja said, days before his London trial that started on July 21. Living in exile in the UK, Raja told the Indian news channel that UK counterterrorism police investigated him for nine months on terrorism charges but fully cleared him. He claimed the defamation trial is the Pakistan army's backup plan to silence him. 'They couldn't get me under counterterrorism, so now they're trying their luck in the courts. The UK is the libel tourism capital of the world — as King's Counsel Geoffrey Robertson says,' he stated. ISI exploiting UK's laws to silence critics? Raja accused Munir and DG ISI Lt Gen Asim Malik of exploiting the UK's lenient libel laws to suppress dissent and conceal military crimes, including political manipulation, judicial interference, and widespread violations of civil liberties. He said that his family in Pakistan faces severe repercussions, with his mother under de facto house arrest and her passport revoked to block his return. 'She's practically under house arrest — her passports have been cancelled. My entire family's nationalities have been blocked,' he said. Raja also disclosed that Shahzad Akbar, a witness in his case, was attacked with acid in the UK, an act he attributes to ISI-orchestrated intimidation. STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD 'The ISI is using all its power to silence this. They just don't want any coverage, because it exposes their soft belly,' he said. Court-martialed in absentia and sentenced to 14 years under Pakistan's Official Secrets Act, Raja insisted his only offence was exposing the military's grip on Pakistan's politics. 'I was committing the cardinal sin: exposing the crimes of my institution — regime change operations, controlling the government, judicial manipulation, and corruption,' he said.

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into a world of global content with local flavor? Download Daily8 app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store