Mojang Class Action LawsuitFiling Announcement
Your submission met the criteria to participate in the Mojang
class action lawsuit.
On the 13th of October, the direct talks with Mojang’s legal
representatives have finalized, where any possibility of an
out of court settlement has failed Mojang’s responseMojang responded as follows, translated from Swedish:
Non corporate translation: We did nothing wrong, and even if we did it’s too late for you to do anything about it. Now that we have fulfilled our obligation to try and resolve things outside of court prior to the class action lawsuit, the final group criteria have been set where we are days away from filing. Introduction (yes this is going to be a long one)Lawsuits are sort of like a battle, where a single detail that may seem insignificant at first may lead to a loss or unfavourable results. From the beginning, one of the objectives of this legal action was for everything to be as transparent as possible, which is why this announcement will go through not just what the criteria is, but also how the criteria was chosen with examples of why it had to be this way. The scope problemMojang will most definitely be attempting to have the case dismissed before it can get to court, by for example, claiming that the group of participants is invalid and that the class action lawsuit cannot proceed because of some technicality. To give you an example of how this would work, let’s say we were seeking GDPR charges; since data protection laws such as GDPR are only applicable to countries in the European union, if we tried to include participants from non EU countries, Mojang could claim that the case has to be dismissed on the basis that a portion of the participants in the group are not from countries where GDPR is applicable. What we are fighting for may seem very simple on the surface, but unfortunately due to how the legal system works it’s very difficult to define damages and thus get a legal process going in a way that encompasses everything that has happened without taking too many risks. In simple terms, the broader a claim is, the harder it is to pursue due to not only time constraints but as it’s easier to lose / deny the claim on a technicality, something we cannot afford to do. Because of this, we’ve determined that the safest way forward to limit the scope of the class action lawsuit to attack specific infractions with very specifically selected set of participation criteria that make it borderline indefensible for Mojang. Our objectives remain the same, but the way we have to go about it is going to require separate class action lawsuits under different sets of claims and participation criteria, where we will begin with the safest possible claim that has the biggest measurable impact, the account migration. One of the questions that may arise is how we could realistically afford more than one class action lawsuit, this is simply made possible given the fact that our legal fees can be recovered from Mojang in the event of a victory which can then be used for further legal action, where the more we win, the more likely Mojang is to accept their losses and be willing to cooperate.
(“The beatings shall continue until The donations and fight aheadWe strongly believe that this initial group is the strongest possible claim, but each legal action thereafter will only be more and more difficult as we become increasingly limited in the way the claims can be made; but by limiting the scope of each legal action, we ensure that we maximize our chances by focusing our resources on the most reliable way forward. One of my objectives has always been for the donors to recover their donation, and since I plan on continuing this fight until all our objectives are met so long as the means are there to do so, in the event that we win this initial class action lawsuit centred around the account migration, a choice will be presented to the donors on whether they would like their donation to be returned at that time or if they would rather have it be used for subsequent legal action. It might seem extremely mental for me to dedicate so much time and effort into what’s at the end of the day a 20$ children’s game, but to me this has become more than just about the game, it’s about justice and the idea that a company can get away with shitting on people’s rights simply because they think they’re rich enough to be above the law, where I simply can’t tolerate the idea of them getting away with it. Mojang has had countless opportunities to stop screwing people over, and yet every single time without fail, they’ve denied any kind of wrongdoing in such blatant and disrespectful ways that have really motivated me to keep going, where they will now have to learn the consequences of angering a highly motivated basement gremlin that really knows how to hold a grudge. I really had the slightest amount of hope that they might realize their mistakes and try to redeem themselves by respecting their users rights during the settlement talks, but they have now more than ever proven that they don’t give a fuck about their users, they are no longer that small game studio that cared about its players, they are a billion dollar corporation that only cares about their bottom line, and that’s exactly how we’re going to address them. The criteria for the first groupThe first group centred around the account migration will comprise of users that reside within a EU member state that purchased the game prior to the 23rd of January 2015. One of the obvious questions that will arise is why the group concerning the migration does not include users that were forced to undergo migration that purchased the game after that date. In simple terms, we believe that data protection regulations like the GDPR have been violated and want to pursue it legally, but it would be very risky to include users that purchased the game after the 23rd of January 2015 up to the date Mojang accounts could no longer be purchased. Why you ask? Take a look at this snapshot of the internet archive’s wayback machine for Minecraft’s terms and conditions from the 27th of January 2015, particularly the Privacy Policy section:
Updated: 23 January 2015 18:00 Mojang sneakily modified the privacy policy on the 23rd of January shortly after their Microsoft acquisition without notification or agreement (as usual), where they claim that Microsoft now has the right to process and store data that had previously been owned by Mojang. The biggest risk as a result of this change is that Mojang would try to claim that any users that bought the game after that point would have already agreed to the processing of their data by Microsoft, which would thus mean that the mandatory move of data to a Microsoft account would not be a data protection & handling violation. This is of course legally questionable because the European Court of Justice ruled that the EU Safe Harbour Framework is unlawful and thus made it illegal for a EU company to hand over data like this (look up the Schrems case if you’re interested in specifics), but it is a massive risk nonetheless. An important thing to note here is that this doesn’t mean the migration was legal at all, it simply puts the GDPR charges into question for that group of users that bought the game after that date, a risk which we eliminate by having the group be made up of users that bought the game before that specific date. Voiding users contracts and forcing them to do something against their interests under threat is still illegal, users that bought the game after that date and had to migrate would be part of the group if we didn’t pursue GDPR charges, but we really want to pursue them since its consequences if found guilty are severe for Mojang. We believe that for the group that purchased the game prior to that date, there is essentially zero plausible defence that Mojang could use to justify any of its actions which is how & why this group criteria was chosen for the initial lawsuit. The follow up class action lawsuit would thus most likely be identical to this first one, but without the GDPR charges which in other words includes users that didn’t meet the criteria for this first one, including the possibility of non EU citizens as EU specific regulations like the GDPR would already have been pursued. This is a very clear example of how easily a case can fall apart if a change like this was not noticed. I understand if there can be some disappointment at not meeting the criteria for this initial class action lawsuit, but hopefully my explanation was sufficient to illustrate the importance of having a well defined group that considers every possibility and risk. We also do not discount the possibility of parallel legal action in collaboration with consumer protection agencies or law firms in different jurisdictions, as a simple example; we were recently contacted and are in talks with an american law firm that is interested in learning more about the case to potentially represent US based users in parallel from us on a contingency basis (no fee, they take a percentage if they win). Any of such possibilities that would require the data from the participation forms to be shared with said entities would of course be directly notified to the users that would qualify to get their explicit agreement to share that data. The claimsThe claims as defined in the filings that will be made public shortly are:
The remediesThe remedies (aka what we want resolved) in this initial case are:
What’s nextSince we imagined that the court would not appreciate stacks of paper that go up to the ceiling due to the sheer amount of participants and its required physical documentation, we’ve made a special arrangement where the court itself has agreed to be responsible for reaching out to the users that met the participation criteria to obtain confirmation about their will to participate. Simply filling out the participation form was not sufficient for us to legally represent users in a legal context as that would require a signed power of attorney (paper that allow a lawyer or law firm to represent you in a legal context). The participation form submissions were the first step that makes it possible for us to prepare the group to then request said authorization; but given our special circumstance the court will be responsible for reaching out and obtaining confirmation that you are real and wish to participate (there have historically been very few class actions in Sweden, where this is magnitudes of order larger than anything the system has seen before). We aren’t exactly sure what they will be sending yet, participants being managed directly by the court through digital means is already a large deviation from the norm, and they might just ask for a written confirmation rather than a signed power of attorney. For those who didn’t meet the criteriaAs stated earlier, our goals remain the same even though we have to achieve it through multiple class actions with specifically defined scopes. If you wish for your submission to be wiped please reach out and we’ll have it done, remaining submissions will be used and considered for further legal action (as previously explained, ctrl+f to section “The donations and fight ahead”); where all data will be set for permanent deletion when we achieve all of our objectives or no longer have the means to continue. For those who met the criteriaWithin the coming days, you will be receiving an email from “Nacka Tingsrätt”, the court in Stockholm responsible for overseeing class action proceedings. As previously mentioned we are not exactly sure about what they will be sending, but expect them to ask if you requested to participate in the class action lawsuit with the possibility of a .pdf that has to be signed (the power of attorney). Their correspondence should contain information about the proceedings and how everything will work. We have compiled a Q&A with relevant questions about participation, if you have any questions that aren’t answered here please reach out. Do I risk anything by participating if we were to lose?No. As a participant, you do not bear any risks whether they be financial or otherwise in the event of a loss. Participants are not responsible for any proceeding costs. Will my full legal name appear on the legal records?Yes, unless there are grounds for it to be redacted. (More info below) Can I mask information about my participation from public legal records?Information can only be masked or redacted if there are sufficient legal grounds for it. (More info below) What condition or grounds do I need to fulfil for my information to be masked or redacted?For information to be redacted, you must be able to demonstrate that it is sensitive and could be exposed to harm if they were to be published, and/or if there is a risk to your personal safety due to threats or violence. If I am underage / below 18 years old, do my parents have to participate for me?You must be of age (above 18) to participate !OR! have the permission of your legal guardians (ie. parents). Can Mojang force me to fly to Sweden and testify in court / give any kind of statement?A user could only be requested to provide a statement if Mojang explicitly requested it and is determined to be of relevant to the case (determined by the judge). If such a case were to happen, you would not be required to fly to Sweden as the statement can be taken in your home country. Can Mojang punish me for participating by for example deleting or blocking my account?No, this would be retaliation which opens grounds for additional lawsuits. Can I change my mind about participation and withdraw whenever I want?Yes, you would simply need to notify the court that you wish to withdraw. If I do not wish to participate now, can I join at a later date as the process is ongoing?No, if the court does not receive a response asking whether you want to participate, you will not have the possibility to become part of the group. Final noteIt’s been quite the journey so far, it’s crazy to think about the circumstances that have led to this which will most certainly go down in history and serve as a turning point for how companies treat their users in regards to digital contracts; the time has finally come to take the giant to court.
If you want to delete your participation submission (which in
turn means no longer receiving these emails, even though I
won't really be sending out anything that wouldn't be
about how you can participate in a future legal process as
stated in this email), please reach out to me via one of the
methods listed below and I'll have it done:
(Or you can reply to this email which automatically forwards it
to kianbrose@proton.me)
|