Judge Able to Resist PSN Lawsuit

October 1, 2009 -

The case of a gamer who sued Sony Computer Entertainment America (SCEA) over being banned from the PlayStation Network has been tossed out of court.

After being banned for “multiple violations” on PSN, the Resistance: Fall of Man player Erik Estavillo had sued SCEA for violating his First Amendment rights (for the PSN ban) and for money he had invested into the PSN Wallet Fund. He sought $55,000 and an injunction that would limit SCEA from banning any players in any form on the network.

Northern District of California District Judge Ronald M Whyte ruled that there was no plausible First Amendment claim for relief stated and dismissed the case.

The Technology & Marketing Law Blog (via Gamasutra) zeroed in on one specific comment of Whyte’s, that “Sony's Network is not similar to a company town.” Blogger Eric Goldman wrote:

…this opinion emphatically rejects a meme that has become pretty popular among virtual world exceptionalists. Some exceptionalists have favored the company town analogy because it enable virtual world customers to reduce an operator's ability to run its business capriciously.

A PDF version of the Order Granting Defendant's Motion To Dismiss is also available on the aforementioned blog.


Comments

Re: Judge Able to Resist PSN Lawsuit

And here I was hoping that Sony would countersue for legal fees and slander/libel/defamation/etc and that the judge would rule for Sony.

 

Or at least rule that the little snot take a f***ing class in government!

Re: Judge Able to Resist PSN Lawsuit

This idiot should have to pay Sony's legal fees for being a dumbass and his lawyer disbarred for taking on such an obviously wrong argument.

Re: Judge Able to Resist PSN Lawsuit

So does this mean MS have a green light to ban gays for saying they are gay in their ID?

--------------------------------------------------

I LIKE the fence. I get 2 groups to laugh at then.

-------------------------------------------------- I LIKE the fence. I get 2 groups to laugh at then.

Re: Judge Able to Resist PSN Lawsuit

The judge that tossed this suit is the same judge that ruled California's anti-game law unconstitutional.

Geaux Saints, Geaux Tigers, Geaux Hornets, Jack Thompson can geaux chase a chupacabra.

Geaux Saints, Geaux Tigers, Geaux Pelicans. Even through the darkest days, this fire burns always.

Re: Judge Able to Resist PSN Lawsuit

...so can Microsoft start banning the homophobes and racists from XBL already?  This is kind of a green light for Sony, Microsoft and pruveyors of other similar services.

Re: Judge Able to Resist PSN Lawsuit

If you banned all those people, Zerodash, the player count on the entirety of XBL would be down to about 23. As much as I hate those annoying...individuals, I don't want to have to play with the same 23 people every day.

Re: Judge Able to Resist PSN Lawsuit

You are, of course, assuming that you're one of those 23, eh?

Personally, I don't think swearing or using racial slurs and other slurs makes you a 'racist' or a 'homophobe' on XBL.  It just means that you chose one way to offend and annoy people over another.

Re: Judge Able to Resist PSN Lawsuit

And kill all the geese that lay the golden eggs? Doubtful.

Re: Judge Able to Resist PSN Lawsuit

Much like how claims came fro ma certai nex lawyer that GP violated his first amendment rights, he wasn't in a public park acting like an ass, so Sony had every right to ban him on their PRIVATELY owned network.

Re: Judge Able to Resist PSN Lawsuit

Remind me to not to forward anymore stories to GP.

--------------------------------------------------

I LIKE the fence. I get 2 groups to laugh at then.

-------------------------------------------------- I LIKE the fence. I get 2 groups to laugh at then.

Re: Judge Able to Resist PSN Lawsuit

Definitely. Online networks are just like any other buisness. How about a restaurant analogy? They reserve the right to refuse service to anyone, and the right to ban unruly customers from the premises.

Re: Judge Able to Resist PSN Lawsuit

Saw that coming. But really, good for that judge.  The complainant had it coming.

 
Forgot your password?
Username :
Password :

Poll

Will Target Australia sell the next GTA game upon its release?:

Shout box

You're not permitted to post shouts.
Andrew EisenIn short, discussions of ethics in journalism? Totally fine. Said indie dev's sex life? Not okay.08/01/2015 - 11:31am
james_fudgeTry talking when you have hundreds of people tweeting at you at the same time :)08/01/2015 - 11:30am
Andrew EisenAnd yet, when 30-seconds of research showed that there was no relevance to said indie dev's sex life, many people kept talking about. Hell, still do to this day. I had a guy on Twitter pester me about this nonsense for an entire day last weekend.08/01/2015 - 11:30am
james_fudgeWhatever dude, you're here posting. No one's stopping you.08/01/2015 - 11:30am
Goth_SkunkBe advised: In approximately 30 minutes I'm heading out of town for an obligatory family reunion. This is being stated so that none can interpret my upcoming 24 hour hiatus as a tail-tucking turn from discussion.08/01/2015 - 11:28am
Goth_SkunkEven now, IronPatriot, MechaCrash, and Craig R. continue to attempt to shout me down and dehumanize me.08/01/2015 - 11:25am
Goth_SkunkWhat transpired afterwards was a concerted effort to shout down and dehumanize those trying to bring these matters out into the open. I remain utterly convinced of this to this day.08/01/2015 - 11:24am
Goth_SkunkAnd yet the sex life of this indie developer tied right into the matter of journalistic ethics, as investigations uncovered a great number of breaches of ethical conduct, both related & not. That scandal is the orifice from which the balloon is inflated.08/01/2015 - 11:20am
MechaCrashI am reminded of the saying about playing chess with a pigeon.08/01/2015 - 11:13am
Andrew EisenThis is supported by, well, what actually happened, but also the text of the actual leaks. That was Tito's question and what he and a few (four total, I think) were discussing.08/01/2015 - 11:11am
Andrew EisenNo, it's not. What was generally prohibited was not discussion of journalistic ethics or other GamerGate topics, but threads that were, for example, discussing the sex life of an indie developer. THOSE are what were locked and removed.08/01/2015 - 11:10am
Goth_SkunkI don't believe you. Not for a second. Every major site with the exception of the Escapist prohibited discussion of GamerGate in its early stages. That is a fact.08/01/2015 - 11:04am
Andrew EisenNo, that's a fact. Don't believe me, read 'em yourself. No one was trying to censor discussion of GamerGate.08/01/2015 - 11:02am
Goth_Skunk@Andrew: That's your opinion.08/01/2015 - 10:57am
Goth_Skunkfuture? I'd compensate you for your time, of course.08/01/2015 - 10:57am
Goth_Skunk@IronPatriot: Congratulations on a sweeping statement to remove the agency of people supporting GamerGate for their own individual reasons. Since you're so good at painting in such broad strokes, are you free to paint my apartment sometime in the near08/01/2015 - 10:57am
Andrew EisenWhich, as you can tell by actually reading the snippets that were leaked, is a shamefully disingenuous telling of what was actually said.08/01/2015 - 10:56am
Goth_SkunkAdditionally, to quote William Usher, "[s]ome of the members on that list actively used their platform to support and propagate a wide-sweeping media narrative based on lies and factual inaccuracies."08/01/2015 - 10:54am
Goth_Skunkthe forums of The Escapist. Thankfully, they were both unsuccessful.08/01/2015 - 10:53am
Goth_SkunkOf the "Gamers Are Dead" articles specifically, no. But the list was used to try and censor discussion about GamerGate in its early stages. Ben Kuchera and our own James Fudge used it to solicit to Escapist then EiC Greg Tito to prevent discussion on08/01/2015 - 10:53am
 

Be Heard - Contact Your Politician