Antonetti v. Activision Blizzard: Video Game Addiction Complaint

• Document: Complaint (jury trial demanded), 191 pages
• Case caption: Michael Antonetti v. Activision Blizzard, Inc., et al.
• Court: U.S. District Court, Northern District of Georgia, Atlanta Division
• Docket number: No. 1:24-cv-02019-TWT
• Date filed: May 8, 2024
• Parties: Plaintiff: Michael Antonetti. Defendants: Activision Blizzard, Infinity Ward, Treyarch, Take-Two Interactive, Rockstar Games, Rockstar Games UK (formerly Rockstar North) and DMA Design, Blizzard Entertainment, Epic Games and Epic Games International Holdings, Ubisoft Entertainment and Ubisoft (Montreal), Mojang Studios, Microsoft, Nintendo of America, and a Doe defendant.
• Causes of action: Strict liability (design defect; failure to warn; failure to instruct), negligence (design; failure to warn; failure to instruct; per se; ordinary; gross), intentional infliction of emotional distress, fraudulent misrepresentation, fraudulent concealment, fraudulent inducement, negligent misrepresentation, civil conspiracy, and in-concert liability.

Transcribed from the complaint's Nature of the Action. These are the plaintiff's allegations.

The complaint alleges that "video game addiction, also called internet gaming disorder, is a condition characterized by severely reduced control over gaming habits and increasing priority given to gaming over other activities, resulting in negative consequences in many aspects of a person's life, including self-care, relationships, school, and work."

It alleges that the defendants "manufactured, published, marketed, and sold video games, gaming platforms, and/or gaming hardware" that they "had specifically developed and designed to cause the addiction experienced" by the plaintiff and other users, using "traditional game tactics such as feedback loops and reward systems, along with patented designs containing addictive features and technology to ensure its users keep playing longer and spending more on 'microtransactions' within the game."

The complaint further alleges that the defendants "design their games to keep consumers playing — and spending — by enlisting the help of behavioral psychologists and neuroscientists" and that, "by acquiring — and addicting — users when they are young," the defendants secure "their profit stream by ensuring future engagement and monetization as these young users age." It characterizes this as the use of "unfair, unconscionable, and deceptive trade practices and conduct that prioritizes gamer engagement and spending over gamer safety."

Emphasis on brain harm. This complaint adds that the defendants make their games addictive "in part, by encouraging long-term, extended game play despite knowledge that such extended play causes physical harm to the human brain — and particularly to a minor's developing brain," and alleges the defendants' conduct "proximately caused Plaintiff brain damage and gaming addiction."

The plaintiff. The complaint alleges the plaintiff plays numerous games "approximately 12 hours per day," including multiple Call of Duty titles, Grand Theft Auto 5, Overwatch 2, Rainbow Six, Fortnite, and Minecraft, and "has also been diagnosed with worsening Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder ('ADHD') and Anxiety due to video game addiction," requiring "out-patient counseling and medication therapy."