I guess it’s current affairs and game related…
Riot Games had a similar suit in the past, which had relatively small impacts in their organization. There were a fair amount of reports on it too, Kotaku’s of note. Curious to the larger outcomes. The $10m payout is peanuts for that company.
In this case, Acti-Blizz is getting his with a state-level lawsuit over discrimination. Personal lawsuits in the US are a dime a dozen. State-level efforts, that frankly millions of dollars invested just making a case. They don’t get issued without a rather high level of confidence that it can be proven. The penalties are not financial – Acti-Blizz revenues are $2b per quarter, so $10m is a hiccup. The penalties here are public, which is weird that we’re in the mode today.
High odds here that there are few execs that are shuffled, maybe a could lose their jobs (Afrasiabi left last year), but I would be really surprised is anything meaningful happens outside of some larger pay-outs to some impacted people. I say this because the executive leadership within that company has been extremely consistent that the only thing that matters is money.
Sidebar – I am convinced that EA has been doing an internal review for years prepping for their eventual suit.
I do understand how these events come to pass. Gamer culture for most of its existence was a “bro” culture, in particular in the more competitive space. Hell, IT culture was full of “a/s/l” questions and then pouncing on anyone that claimed to be female. Picking on Acti-Blizz here, but it’s rampant across the industry. It’s better now, but that’s like comparing a forest fire to a house fire. There are still some big issues to sort out. Riot Games is an interesting example here, as they went to great lengths to build a corporate culture that was reflective of their gaming culture – competitive and aggressive. Wilting flowers got nowhere. Acti-Blizz seems on another level though, where it was outright abusive, and top brass was aware.
What I find the most interesting in all this is the response that Acti-Blizz put out afterwards (emphasis mine).
We are sickened by the reprehensible conduct of the DFEH to drag into the complaint the tragic suicide of an employee whose passing has no bearing whatsoever on this case and with no regard for her grieving family. While we find this behavior to be disgraceful and unprofessional, it is unfortunately an example of how they have conducted themselves throughout the course of their investigation. It is this type of irresponsible behavior from unaccountable State bureaucrats that are driving many of the State’s best businesses out of California.
I have experience in how this process works, though obviously in another country. The company is made aware of pending litigation (if individuals are not indicted), giving the company some time to prepare their statements. The legal team at Acti-Blizz had time to prepare this statement and get it approved. The wording is purposeful.
Ad-hominem arguments are an extremely effective defense – they question the ability of an individual. You’ve seen enough where the defense questions the integrity of a witness, not the actuals facts of the case. The media has conditioned us to look past the facts and at the ideas – Nancy Grace is the best example that comes to mind. But this only works on individuals. It’s a big challenge to sway public opinion on an organization that is established to support people’s rights.
I remain curious as to where this path goes.