So, I am actually a licensed attorney, but not for the State of California. For my own anonymity, I’ll simply say I’m on the East Coast, and I represent business interests; I get paid to be universally hated. I’ll keep this brief, because it’s a game forum. I don’t expect anyone to have much of an attention span for many details, as it’s infamously a tl;dr crowd. Specifically, I’ll touch mostly on Blizzard’s statement.
First, I’d remind everyone that everything is an “allegation” until it meets summary judgment in court. It does not mean it’s unofficially unproven. This is simply a Constitutional protection. Given that the State conducted this investigation, and filed the legal complaint, they absolutely have evidence.
In Blizzard’s response, they state: "The DFEH included distorted, and in many cases false, descriptions of Blizzard’s past." This is exactly what I would have instructed my client to say in an official statement, but not for the reasons some might think. This message is not meant for players or regular people — it’s meant for stockholders. Many stockholders in large companies have absolutely no idea what they’ve invested in, rather just that they’ve invested in something that appears to be a good business interest for profit. They won’t read the lawsuit, only that there is one, and they want to see that their investment is prepared to defend against it. That’s all they need, and all they want.
Unfortunately, the remainder of this is not what I would have suggested in a statement:
”We have been extremely cooperative with the DFEH throughout their investigation, including providing them with extensive data and ample documentation, but they refused to inform us what issues they perceived.”
This was fine until the last bit. They are not legally required to do so. Any firm representing Activision/Blizzard should know better, unless this statement was not crafted by an attorney. It looks like it was not, and it appears rushed.
"They were required by law to adequately investigate and to have good faith discussions with us to better understand and to resolve any claims or concerns before going to litigation, but they failed to do so."
Actually, no, and largely because this was an investigation rather than a corrective measure. The claims and concerns border criminal liability, and litigation was inevitable. In fact, litigation is preferred as it creates a court record, as private settlements can be disputed later.
"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 the grieving family.”
This was a dire legal mistake. The DFEH obviously decided it was relevant, and said “grieving family” was likely notified before the case was filed. Going on the direct attack in this manner will come back to them if the family uses this lawsuit as a springboard for further civil litigation for damages. The family could also claim Blizzard made a false statement on behalf of the family. I cannot stress strongly enough how wrong this was.
"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.”
Again, this was a mistake. The beginning and end of the entire statement should have been denial followed by willful compliance. That’s all the shareholders need, and all that should have been legally stated. This absolutely makes me believe the statement was not crafted by an attorney, and the continued attack on State processes and agencies reeks of projection.
I won’t go any further into it except to say Blizzard showed their hand with this statement, and it will work against them in both civil court, and the court of public opinion. It is too late to correct anything now. The damage has been done. They should not have issued anything like this, and I would have seriously considered a meeting with the partners to consider termination of legal representation if we were representing them.
Where I see this going from here is pretty simple: Things will go quiet for a little while. There will be a large settlement, and likely an NDA signed by all parties never to discuss the matter again. The State will likely move to criminally charge Alex Afrasiabi, which will be made public. It would be in Blizzard’s best legal interests to pin everything on Afrasiabi, and quietly dismiss anyone else related to the case, if they are still working for the company. Give them an “early retirement” incentive, along with another NDA regarding the reason behind their release/retirement.
This turned out to be longer than I expected. I could go on, but it would be pages of expressed facepalming on how Blizzard handled this. I really just can’t say enough how big of a mistake this statement was, all of it, not just the paragraph I cited.
Edit: I’ll add a legal edit that this is my personal opinion, based upon my own knowledge and understanding of the situation and others like it. I am in no way representing or involved with any party. My opinion is not to be misconstrued as legal judgment or representative advice for anything revolving around this case."
Originally Posted by ItMe
Reply With Quote
