Dunn v. Activision Blizzard: Video Game Addiction Complaint

• Document: Amended Complaint (jury trial demanded)
• Case caption: Casey Dunn, individually and on behalf of G.D., a minor, and Thomas Dunn v. Activision Blizzard, Inc., et al.
• Court: U.S. District Court, Eastern District of Arkansas, Northern Division
• Docket number: No. 3:23-cv-00224-JM
• Date filed: November 3, 2023 (amended complaint)
• Parties: Plaintiffs: Casey Dunn and Thomas Dunn, on behalf of their minor child G.D. Defendants: Activision Blizzard, Infinity Ward, Treyarch, Sledgehammer Games, Microsoft, Epic Games, EA Digital Illusions CE (DICE), Electronic Arts, Ubisoft (Montreal and Entertainment), Nintendo of America, Google, and Doe defendants.
• Causes of action: Strict liability (failure to warn), negligence (failure to warn), violation of the Arkansas Deceptive Trade Practices Act, deceit / fraudulent misrepresentation, fraudulent concealment, civil conspiracy, and loss of consortium, among other counts. (The JPML noted that every complaint in this group brings a civil conspiracy claim.)

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."

The plaintiff. The complaint alleges that G.D., a minor, "specifically has experienced severe emotional distress, physical injuries, diminished social interactions, a drop in grades and inability to attend school, depression, lack of interest in other hobbies and sports, withdrawal symptoms such as rage, anger, and physical outburst, and diagnoses of ADHD and Dyslexia," and that G.D. "required an Individualized Educational Plan ('IEP'), out-patient counseling, and Focalin medication to control impulsivity and lack of control."