Please support Game Informer. Print magazine subscriptions are less than $2 per issue
Judge Dismisses Battlefield 4 Class Action Lawsuit
U.S. District Judge Susan Illston issued a ruling this week in favor of Electronic Arts in a class action suit with EA investors over the disappointing performance of Battlefield 4.
The judge said that statements by EA executives before the game's release for last-gen systems on October 29, 2013 were not made to artificially inflate the company's stock price and did not constitute securities fraud as the lawsuit claims. Instead, the judge said they were "puffery" not meant to mislead investors, but rather statements of opinion and corporate optimism.
Included in the class action's list of deceptions were media statements and awards lauding the game at E3 and other conferences where the game was shown. The complaint also relied on statements from developer DICE in the fall before launch citing the difficulties the company was having developing and testing the game.
"Defendant Gibeau's [EA Labels president Frank Gibeau - Ed.] May 7, 2013 statement that EA was in a 'much better state' for the next-generation transition and that Frostbite 3 had 'largely been de-risked' is a non-actionable vague expression of corporate optimism and puffery upon which no reasonable investor would rely." Judge Illston's ruling read. Gibeau's comment was one of eight statements that the complaint deemed were "materially false or misleading."
Despite this dismissal, the judge allowed the plaintiffs to amend the dates in the lawsuit during which stock was purchased. Five of the eight statements by EA executives occurred after the lead plaintiffs purchased their stock on October 16. The complaint can also be amended to include new lead plaintiffs who purchased stock after all the statements were made. An amended complaint must be filed on or before November 3, 2014.
[Source: Gamasutra via Courthouse News]
Our Take:
The lawsuit is an interesting one since as gamers we often hear similar statements of optimism from developers and executives. It remains to be seen whether EA's leadership or those of any other company will temper their statements in the future to avoid similar lawsuits.
I'm certainly not a lawyer [big disclaimer!], but even if a new lawsuit occurs with different dates during which a lead plaintiff purchased stock, I imagine Judge Illston's ruling that the statements themselves were not misleading would continue to protect EA. We'll see.
I’d like to ask you to support Game Informer’s continued coverage of games with a subscription. For less than two dollars per issue, we mail you a full year of 10 print magazines, each with cover stories and preview features filled with exclusive details about the most exciting upcoming games. We profile and interview game creators. We look back on the rich history of gaming, and we celebrate what’s next.
Here on the website, we offer much of our content for free, including game reviews, daily news, videos, event coverage, and more – all with minimal ads.
We do so with a small editorial team, alongside contributing paid writers from around the world – over 65 individuals from 9 countries around the world, just in the last couple of years.
It’s not possible without support.
In a time when game makers and games coverage have faced hard struggles and layoffs, the future of this 30+ year magazine and community is at risk. Our new standalone magazine subscription is the number one way you can keep us alive – and we believe you’ll get a pretty fantastic gaming magazine in your mailbox every few weeks for your trouble.
Thank you.
