Activision Call of Duty Case Jurisdiction Heads to Arbitration

An arbitrator will decide whether Activision Blizzard Inc. can force into arbitration claims that the company has an unlawful monopoly over professional Call of Duty leagues and tournaments, according to Los Angeles federal court filings.

Lawyers for Activision and some of the game’s top players requested on Friday that US District Judge Percy Anderson pause court proceedings in the Central District of California until arbitration concludes. The novel suit questions the legal power of publishers over those playing their games in competitions and could hand more power to players and teams that seek to profit from playing the video games in the esports industry.

Plaintiffs Hector Rodriguez, known as “H3CZ,” and Seth Abner, known as “Scump,” alleged last month that Activision took over the market for fans to watch top players compete in the game, which they call “the ‘esport’ equivalent of professional football,” and closed off all leagues except its own. Many popular teams were allegedly forced out of competition due to “financially devastating terms,” according to the Feb. 15 complaint.

Activision responded to the complaint in a February comment, saying the claims are without merit and “disruptive to team owners, players, fans, and partners.”

Neither Activision nor the players’ attorneys immediately provided comment Monday.

According to court documents, the parties agreed to have an arbitrator decide the initial jurisdictional issue of the claims to keep down costs. However, the players continue to dispute that their claims are subject to an arbitration agreement.

The lawyers will notify the court within fourteen days of the arbitrator’s rulings, according to court documents.

Dynamis LLP represents Rodriguez and Abner. Hueston Hennigan LLP represents Activision Blizzard.

The case is Rodriguez v. Activision Blizzard Inc., C.D. Cal., No. 2:24-cv-01287-PA-MAA, stipulation to stay case 3/1/24.