Mom Defends Her Fortnite Cheating Offspring in Court

Kind of missed my point, he's 14. The EULA is a contract. A minor can not enter into any contract of his own accord without parental/guardian authority to do so (i.e. someone else to co-sign). It doesn't matter if he clicks a button claiming he's 18, or lied on a statement that said he's 18, he's still a minor and it's up to the company who has said contract that they verify the person "signing" it is who they say, if they want to go to the least common denominator of having a simple box to check then that's on them. So all of those contract terms, do not apply to him. The other side of it is yes the company can absolutely ban him and try to prevent him from playing, you do not need a EULA for that. But using any of the language of the EULA as reasoning for said lawsuit will not apply in this case.

My "legal" counter to this though was the fact that the mom gave her son unfettered permission to download/install/etc, could constitute a broad range of "giving permission" for everything her son does.



And yes Mom would in fact be legally responsible for the bullshit DMCA laws that her son probably broke in the same way as if your kid downloaded 72 songs *snicker*, I'm sure it's a legal matter of changing the lawsuit to be "Parent and or Guardian of douche bag cheater boy" , but again injecting code into the game via breaking encryption/etc/etc is a DMCA matter not one of the EULA.

The video earlier in the thread was from an actual lawyer explaining that the kid can actually enter a legal contract so your statement is not accurate.
 
What false claims?


Wait a minute, this is showing everything in a different light.


If this REDDITor's post is accurate, (I can't get to Kotaku from work), the law suite against the kid is specifically, not generally, in response to the kids counter to the DCMA take-down request. In essence, it's the only way that Epic can pursue the take-down request because the kid counter filed against it. Epic has to sue the kid or drop the take-down request, and this is what the suite is over, not for the cheating part of the story.
I think DMCA is used too broadly. Maybe they need to come up with some laws that apply specifically to things like this. Maybe digital vandalism or defacement or something? Just thinking aloud. Once again, not a lawyer, but I don't think this was the intent when the DMCA was instantiated. I'm sure a lawyer can show me 100 reasons why it's a black and white classic case of copyright infringement, but maybe it should be something else with different penalties. (creating and/or promoting cheats, hacks, etc.)


Why, look at this case as a perfect example. The kid posted something that he really shouldn't have, Epic sent the DCMA Takedown notice, normally no one would fight that unless they had good cause, but this kid does, and leaves Epic having to sue or let the kid keep posting his video, maybe more, of exactly how to cheat in Epic's game, and the terrible message it sends to other kids like him.

And that is the other thing, how easy can Epic go on the kid without creating a thousand new cheaters?
 
Yeah, looks like that appeal was the problem for both parties. Anyone that I know that's received a DMCA notice took it at face value and complied. Appealing it was pretty stupid. But then, he's a stupid kid. Well, hopefully the judgement is on the low side, so as not to be too heavy handed, but is sufficient to scare him.
 
Kind of missed my point, he's 14. The EULA is a contract. A minor can not enter into any contract of his own accord without parental/guardian authority to do so (i.e. someone else to co-sign). It doesn't matter if he clicks a button claiming he's 18, or lied on a statement that said he's 18, he's still a minor and it's up to the company who has said contract that they verify the person "signing" it is who they say, if they want to go to the least common denominator of having a simple box to check then that's on them. So all of those contract terms, do not apply to him. The other side of it is yes the company can absolutely ban him and try to prevent him from playing, you do not need a EULA for that. But using any of the language of the EULA as reasoning for said lawsuit will not apply in this case.

My "legal" counter to this though was the fact that the mom gave her son unfettered permission to download/install/etc, could constitute a broad range of "giving permission" for everything her son does.



And yes Mom would in fact be legally responsible for the bullshit DMCA laws that her son probably broke in the same way as if your kid downloaded 72 songs *snicker*, I'm sure it's a legal matter of changing the lawsuit to be "Parent and or Guardian of douche bag cheater boy" , but again injecting code into the game via breaking encryption/etc/etc is a DMCA matter not one of the EULA.

Minors can and in fact do enter into contracts. My 10yr old daughter has multiple contracts signed with an agent, manager, etc. The law protects her in that she cannot be forced to stay in said contract if she decides to leave but that only protects her until she's of age. That however doesn't mean they can do whatever the eff they want. They can't for example many examples, commit crimes and get away with it. And as you eluded when they write checks they cannot cash, that responsibility falls unto their parents. Thus in the end it does work itself out. The judge will ask the douchebag mom, why she didn't control her son to which she won't have an answer. I can imagine Judge Judy going off on the mom lol.
 
Wait a minute, this is showing everything in a different light.


If this REDDITor's post is accurate, (I can't get to Kotaku from work), the law suite against the kid is specifically, not generally, in response to the kids counter to the DCMA take-down request. In essence, it's the only way that Epic can pursue the take-down request because the kid counter filed against it. Epic has to sue the kid or drop the take-down request, and this is what the suite is over, not for the cheating part of the story.



Why, look at this case as a perfect example. The kid posted something that he really shouldn't have, Epic sent the DCMA Takedown notice, normally no one would fight that unless they had good cause, but this kid does, and leaves Epic having to sue or let the kid keep posting his video, maybe more, of exactly how to cheat in Epic's game, and the terrible message it sends to other kids like him.

And that is the other thing, how easy can Epic go on the kid without creating a thousand new cheaters?


Yup, nobody loves the noobie here but i said this already. :( Nobody loves me :p. Like verbatim on page 2... lol.

Did i win the internet for today?
 
i dont really care to much about his age (maybe the sum they are asking for might be a little high so all you can do is counter it as most people don't have 150k lying around so its go go bankrupt defending it or go bankrupt )

i have Zero issues with any game dev going after cheaters (kids unfortunately are the worst) i just wish there was faster ways of handling it (impossible killing should be a auto ban like no line of sight killing, killing 10 people in like 3 seconds assuming a gun is used not a rocket)

for games like CS:go and a like the reporting temp ban mid game when reported by a trusted reporter for review,, the idea is if people reporting players should get a rank based on how many successfull verified actual cheating has happened , so players who report actual cheaters (not just because they have a high score) will have the power to eject someone from the game and temp ban them until there case is overwatched which should get put to the near top of the stack(idea is within 24 hours i really dont know what the backlog is on overwatch is), but if they report some one who is not cheating they get put back into report only for some time until they get trust backup and the person will be queued up for overwatch with out a temp ban

so idea is verified account with a verified address, no bans on file , stream guard + prime , older age of account, a high percentage correctly reported overwatch cases, and correct reports that was successful on overwatch by others (so it would be important to pick the right thing ,don't just pick all 3 if it's walls only pick walls, if its a spin bot then it will be all of them)
 
I did actually miss the part about the counterclaim. I did know he was asking for donations and had promoted the cheat. This to me just falls under the general stupidity clause. Filing the counterclaim is what IMO does in fact push it a bit further.

So, ok, I agree with you there. I still disagree on the the actual amounts sought for damages. I still think that goes a bit too far, and a lot farther than just "learning the hard way".

Take down the site. Fine him a more reasonable amount of money. Issue a court order against him being online, under threat of harsher judgements, and call it good. Even for what he did $150K is WAY too much. That's my opinion of course.

From what I gather, they are only fining him the amount of money that he earned from the "donations". To me that is entirely reasonable. Let's just hope he didn't spend all the money already...
 
What false claims?

They DMCAd his Youtube video of playing the game and showing how to cheat. He was a bastard and deserves what he gets, but that is a shitty practice as well. Not sure if showing a cheat qualifies as copyright infringement. It reeks of incompetence in dealing with the real problem and going with the increasingly used bully method of their own.

Would a video showing how to exploit a car bug and selling a tool to break in it be copyright infringement?
 
Last edited:
They DMCAd his Youtube video of playing the game and showing how to cheat. He was a bastard and deserves what he gets, but that is a shitty practice as well. Not sure if showing a cheat qualifies as copyright infringement. It reeks of incompetence in dealing with the real problem and going with the increasingly used bully method of their own.

Would a video showing how to exploit a car bug and selling a tool to break in it be copyright infringement?

They've banned him several times and he keeps pulling the same crap and he was making money off his videos and showing people how to cheat. Epic getting those videos taken down is the right move. Taking them down gives the people a strike on their account, but strikes don't last forever and it is a very civil way of dealing with those videos.
 
Like I said, its overly harsh for Epic to be hunting people down for thousands of dollars simply for the crime of having their 14 year old being caught cheating in a game. Im pretty sure the vast majority of people arent likely to look favorably on such a scenario occurring. All Epic needs to do is teach the kid a lesson, conduct a lawsuit, but seek proportional damages. The lawsuit will indeed cost more money than the damages, but I cant see a scenario where Epic can "shake down" people and pay for lawyer costs as a viable solution. No, in seeking a lawsuit, Epic has decided to send a message, and to accept the costs of the message.
This is not an Epic money grab, it is Epic showing that it gives a shit about the community playing its game, plain and simple. Epic will never come to collect any judgment, but if this family wants to stand up and give Epic the finger while Epic is championing its players, I think Epic is just in taking the family to the mat.

Good on Epic!

Cheating in multiplayer is the bane of multiplayer sales at its core. If Epic can prove to the game playing community that it is steadfast in committing to the sovereignty of its game, I think many will notice and flock to that.
 
They've banned him several times and he keeps pulling the same crap and he was making money off his videos and showing people how to cheat. Epic getting those videos taken down is the right move. Taking them down gives the people a strike on their account, but strikes don't last forever and it is a very civil way of dealing with those videos.
Two wrongs don't make a right. False DMCA claims aren't a civil way of doing things.
 
Last edited:
Two wrongs don't make a right. False claims aren't a civil way of doing things.

What the hell are you talking about? There is no proof of false claims from Epic. Cheaters DO cost them money. It costs money to fight people hacking the game, it costs money to defend themselves from cheaters, and cheaters by-pass systems put in place for them to make money off of their game. You can try to twist things all you want, but Epic is 100% in the right here. The kid was a fucking dumbass for filing a counter claim. The idiot's mother can say whatever she wants, doesn't make it true. It left Epic with no recourse but to file a lawsuit. Youtube leaves companies no other options. Its either let the video go back up or take it to court. Epic is suing for any money the moron made off of donations. You act like they're going after him for millions of dollars.
 
What the hell are you talking about? There is no proof of false claims from Epic. Cheaters DO cost them money. It costs money to fight people hacking the game, it costs money to defend themselves from cheaters, and cheaters by-pass systems put in place for them to make money off of their game. You can try to twist things all you want, but Epic is 100% in the right here. The kid was a fucking dumbass for filing a counter claim. The idiot's mother can say whatever she wants, doesn't make it true. It left Epic with no recourse but to file a lawsuit. Youtube leaves companies no other options. Its either let the video go back up or take it to court. Epic is suing for any money the moron made off of donations. You act like they're going after him for millions of dollars.
Please read before replying. I'm talking specifically about the DMCA, not going after him in general.
 
Please read before replying. I'm talking specifically about the DMCA, not going after him in general.

I did, I even re-read the article before that reply. My opinion still stands. As for the copyright question: Yes, it still counts. Let's play style videos are NOT covered under fair use protection. There is an argument to be made that they should be, but until a case sets legal precedent they have no legal protection and exist solely at the whims of game studios. And then there is the issue with him modifying the game without permission, violating the EULA. He's been banned so many times for cheating I'd bet Epic has proof of him doing it. Which further justifies them going after the video.
 
Last edited:
From what I gather, they are only fining him the amount of money that he earned from the "donations". To me that is entirely reasonable. Let's just hope he didn't spend all the money already...


Actually I have a problem with that though I am not sure many will agree.

A civil suite is not about how much money someone received doing something wrong. It's about the damages their actions caused. Epic must prove to a jury, (and when it comes to juries, your mileage may vary), that one, the kid violated the EULA or if the above post about the DCMA challenge is correct, that the youtube video violates the DCMA protections afforded to Epic as a rights holder. Then, if the jury buys that, then Epic must show damages and if they can't show that the kid's video cost Epic money, then there is no award. So this suite has to be about damages, not about what the kid earned.

If the kid was running a rouge game server "stealing business", then damages could be tied to the revenue the kid brought in. But in this case, the kids earnings from the donations need to be seen as money that Epic lost, or money earned that should belong to Epic instead. Epic must have suffered loss or it has no damages to claim.

Now it's possible that Epic can prove one, the other, maybe even both. If Epic goes for the throat, they will say that the kid's Youtube video and cheating support harmed Epic in big ways and cost Epic a bunch of money and they will go for the $15,000 or whatever number they decided they can prove.

On the other hand, if they mostly just want this kid to take down his video and stop with the cheating bullshit, they will try and say that the revenue the kid pulled in was earned by exploiting Epic's IP and claim that revenue for themselves.

It'll be interesting if this goes all the way to trial. If they settle then I think it'll be because Epic just wants the kid to drop the video and agree to stop supporting cheating against their game and agree not to play their game anymore. And in that case, Mom should bless her lucky stars and beat junior and make sure junior doesn't start any more shit with Epic. But if it goes to trial, then I think it's cause Epic is going the other route and intends to make an example of this kid believing that they can't afford such a public challenge to stand. It would make everyone think Epic can't do anything about cheating even when they really want to.
 
From what I gather, they are only fining him the amount of money that he earned from the "donations". To me that is entirely reasonable. Let's just hope he didn't spend all the money already...
Wait, he got $150k in donations for making a video showing how to cheat in a game, and probably not the only one on youtube? Fuck me why do I even have a job, people apparently have money to just throw at people! Whether it's Twitch or Youtube, or anything else "oh hey I like watching you play games, here's $5"
 
A civil suite is not about how much money someone received doing something wrong. It's about the damages their actions caused.
Don't forget in many circumstances it can be also used as a warning to others, the whole "an example must be made" situations. Which has happened many times in DMCA circumstances.
 
I did, I even re-read the article before that reply. My opinion still stands. As for the copyright question: Yes, it still counts. Let's play style videos are NOT covered under fair use protection. There is an argument to be made that they should be, but until a case sets legal precedent they have no legal protection and exist solely at the whims of game studios. And then there is the issue with him modifying the game without permission, violating the EULA. He's been banned so many times for cheating I'd bet Epic has proof of him doing it. Which further justifies them going after the video.

The only thing I'd worry about with this is WHICH case sets the precedent for fair use, let's play, long play, etc. and whether protective actions start seeping into legitimate (non-malicious) territory. I really wouldn't want to see this particular case become the standard. It's a little too messy for my liking.
 
Wait, he got $150k in donations for making a video showing how to cheat in a game, and probably not the only one on youtube? Fuck me why do I even have a job, people apparently have money to just throw at people! Whether it's Twitch or Youtube, or anything else "oh hey I like watching you play games, here's $5"

I don't think that's the case. I believe (and correct me if I'm wrong) that this might be a max damage or some other nice round number to sue for. I don't believe that he could actually make that kind of money from this particular video, or even off of this game in general. Maybe it's maximum for one count of "copyright infringement" in a case like this, and then they just see what they're awarded. Not only do I not believe he made this kind of money off it, I also don't think that Epic can prove that they lost out on that kind of money due to his actions.
 
Don't forget in many circumstances it can be also used as a warning to others, the whole "an example must be made" situations. Which has happened many times in DMCA circumstances.

Like I said, I think putting him in a cage, with a sign that says I cheat in Fortnite over it, and letting people throw rotten vegetables at him is the proper method of punishment.
 
The only thing I'd worry about with this is WHICH case sets the precedent for fair use, let's play, long play, etc. and whether protective actions start seeping into legitimate (non-malicious) territory. I really wouldn't want to see this particular case become the standard. It's a little too messy for my liking.

Yeah. I doubt this case will make it all the way through a trial, I imagine they will end up settling out of court. I wonder if things would fall on the side of LPers if things did go all the way through a trial anyway. I think LPs should be fair use, but I wonder if they would fit the legal qualifications of transformative.
 
Yeah. I doubt this case will make it all the way through a trial, I imagine they will end up settling out of court. I wonder if things would fall on the side of LPers if things did go all the way through a trial anyway. I think LPs should be fair use, but I wonder if they would fit the legal qualifications of transformative.

I believe some game companies have threatened DMCA for showing videos that go past a certain point in the game. I think Atlus was one, but I can't remember off the top of my head. I'm also not sure if that was timed, where they just didn't want too much of the game revealed too quickly, or if it still stands now. Read about it somewhere. I'm also not sure how getting donations for say, an LP channel works into fair use. If it's to keep the channel alive, I would hope it's ok, but I could see lawyers taking it the wrong way in that the player is making a living off of the videos. (and in many cases this very well could be what's happening) But... how does one separate all of this. I tend to think companies and lawyers like blanket policies to keep things simple, in some cases protected, and in others lucrative...
 
Like I said, I think putting him in a cage, with a sign that says I cheat in Fortnite over it, and letting people throw rotten vegetables at him is the proper method of punishment.
Which ironically would be called "cruel and unusual punishment" and not be allowed, yet putting a family into potential financial ruin is perfectly ok in our society!

Of course the idea is that this isn't "punishment" for laws being broken, this is a dispute between two parties.
 
Two wrongs don't make a right. False DMCA claims aren't a civil way of doing things.
plenty of people are whining about a false DMCA claim.... But I haven't seen much elaboration on why it's a false DMCA claim....

What about their claim was false?

He literally showed people how to get a game-modifying hack and install / use it directly in the video.

How is that a falsely labled DMCA claim?
 
I think the real news story here is that people are actually playing Fortnite

Maybe Epic should just feel lucky that they have a following. :D Kidding (mostly...) Still, I'm of the opinion that they should have kept working on UT4 more before putting something like this out. Oh well...
 
Don't forget in many circumstances it can be also used as a warning to others, the whole "an example must be made" situations. Which has happened many times in DMCA circumstances.

You are correct, there can be a punitive or "make an example" element to a civil action. Sometimes this is part of the award for something like a malpractice case where a hospital for instance, has done something pretty inhuman to a patient and the Jury recognizes and determines to make an example of the hospital and their staff.
 
I don't think that's the case. I believe (and correct me if I'm wrong) that this might be a max damage or some other nice round number to sue for. I don't believe that he could actually make that kind of money from this particular video, or even off of this game in general. Maybe it's maximum for one count of "copyright infringement" in a case like this, and then they just see what they're awarded. Not only do I not believe he made this kind of money off it, I also don't think that Epic can prove that they lost out on that kind of money due to his actions.

I haven't seen anywhere yet, where EPIC has stated what they want in damages from the kid. Thing is, the kid posted his video, Epic sent a tack down notice, the kid responded with a challenge, and Epic has responded by filing a law suite, the kid;'s Mom is trying to mobilize the media, has a lawyer, and has made a letter public. Epic has made no reply to the mother's letter and been pretty quiet as far as I can tell.

But this boy isn't the only suite that Epic has filed. They have another case going where they are seeking $150K in damages from two men who "worked for" a game cheat outfit that creates and sells the cheat software that this boy used and got himself in trouble over. The boy's Youtube video was essentially promoting the cheats. I am pretty sure that this is where people are getting the $150K from, and it also may indeed be the maximum award allowed for a single count of the related offense.
 
plenty of people are whining about a false DMCA claim.... But I haven't seen much elaboration on why it's a false DMCA claim....

What about their claim was false?

He literally showed people how to get a game-modifying hack and install / use it directly in the video.

How is that a falsely labled DMCA claim?
How is a video about him using a cheating tool a copyright infringement?
 
the DMCA can cover modifying existing software.

It wasn't a cheat code, it was an external application modifying the software.

Which makes sense. It sounds though as if the DMCA is being used against the video, and subsequently the donations gained from that. Making a video about how to use such a tool isn't actually doing any code modification. That could be a bit more on the blurry side.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Meeho
like this
Which makes sense. It sounds though as if the DMCA is being used against the video, and subsequently the donations gained from that. Making a video about how to use such a tool isn't actually doing any code modification. That could be a bit more on the blurry side.
only sort of.

"Here's a tool you can use to cheat by fucking with the game"

"Here's how you install it"

"Here's me using it in the game."
 
only sort of.

"Here's a tool you can use to cheat by fucking with the game"

"Here's how you install it"

"Here's me using it in the game."

Yeah, not saying it's in the clear, just a little less clear cut. I'm not sure what they'd need to do legally to go after him using logs showing him actually running and using the tool instead, but I would think that would be better than going the roundabout way with the DMCA on the video. Maybe not though. As mentioned above, if he just didn't challenge the DMCA, this wouldn't even be happening right now.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Meeho
like this
Does modifying the binary itself prior to execution or modifying process memory after initial execution considered modifying the "software". Examples of this being "OK" could be fraps or nvidias fps counter.
 
Back
Top