Activision Blizzard is one of the most problematic game companies of recent years. Moreover, it is tragic that he got this title not with the games they made, but with the scandals he could not manage within the company. Microsoft took action when the scandals with the founder and CEO of the company, Bobby Kotick, lowered the value of the company.
Microsoft, which is preparing to buy the company by paying billions of dollars, will also take this scandal-filled history with the company. Before the acquisition was completed, the judgment against Activison Blizzard’s current problems came from the judiciary. However, this decision will likely cause intense reactions in the coming days.
Activision Blizzard Investor Lawsuit dismissed
A lawsuit was filed by the investors after the employees in the company complained about sexual assault incidents intensively. While the court was expected to take action against these scandals in the company, district judge Percy Anderson rejected the case. Thus, the lawsuit filed by the company’s investors was lost. Plaintiffs will be able to sue again with their new findings after 30 days.
It may sound strange for an investor to take the company they invested in to court. However, the scandals in Activision Bizzard are known to everyone, and this lowers the value of the company. When the value of the company drops, investors can lose up to millions of dollars. The increase in harassment and mobbing discourses in the company must have angered the investors.
District Judge Anderson’s full statement on dismissal is as follows:
Plaintiffs argued that the media’s reaction to news about regulatory investigations, and the defendants’ statement in response to the DFEH Action, that regulatory investigations were mundane or routine. claims to be contrary to any opinion. However, such claims constitute “historical fraud” and, in the absence of specific, temporal facts, are insufficient to support an allegation of securities fraud.
To the extent that plaintiffs claim that defendants should have known that sexual harassment and discrimination is pervasive because of their position in the company, [first amended complaint] does not provide the necessary facts to support such a conclusion.
Percy Anderson
As can be seen from the explanation, the reason for the dismissal of the case seems to be that the plaintiffs went to court without sufficient evidence. While this is a solvable issue, plaintiffs have at least 30 days ahead of them.
5484
