Top
660°

Activision issues subpoena to Reddit to find Modern Warfare battle royale leaker

Activision wants revenge on those who leaked the brand new Call of Duty: Modern Warfare battle mode. The company issued a subpoena against Reddit to expose the culprit.

Read Full Story >>
gamerevolution.com
Oculus Quest Giveaway! Click Here to Enter
The story is too old to be commented.
Jin_Sakai40d ago

How is it their fault the game glitches and lets you in? Blame yourself Activision.

meka261140d ago

Was gonna say the same, leaks should not be a lawsuit type of offense. The company screwed up so get it taken care of on your end, any gamer is gonna take early access if they can.

rainslacker39d ago (Edited 39d ago )

It's only a lawsuit if the leak was leaked by someone with an NDA. Accidental discovery, and then reporting, is not a litigious offense. If they streamed some of that stuff, then they can be slapped with a DMCA claim, but that can't go straight to litigation or resolution without it first being hit with a DMCA claim, and giving the offender a chance to take it down.

Digging into code that is made available to you isn't illegal, although reverse engineering can be if it is used for more than this. A person using an exploit, or the software or released product, or some company released info doing more than it was intended, is not the fault of the person who relays it to others.

Think this is more posturing on Activisions part. An exploit is something done with provided code, and it's not illegal for the user to use such exploits to get to parts of software that are not meant to be exposed. If they wanted to keep it secret, maybe they shouldn't have released that code in the first place.

The best Activision has here is a copyright infringement suit, and posting a single picture, with information about that picture, is most certainly under fair use. I'm surprised the court ever issued this subpoena, and I hope that reddit fights it on principal.

ilikestuff39d ago

I don’t like call of duty anymore.

xTonyMontana39d ago

It's just them flexing their corporate muscle trying to intimidate and discourage future leakers. Whether it holds up is irrelevant, people will remember them trying. Hopefully reddit can tell them to legally go do one, I can't imagine it's binding.

Kumakai39d ago (Edited 39d ago )

cuz you agree to the terms when you play the companies software. those agreements no one reads

Jin_Sakai39d ago

“cuz you agree to the terms when you play the companies software. those agreements no one reads”

If a game has a glitch that lets people play an unannounced game mode then that’s on them. I don’t care what “those agreements” say.

rainslacker39d ago

While true, in this case, the code provided the user allowed them to get to the information. It may not have been the intent of the developers to allow that to happen, but that doesn't make the user culpable for potential illegal activity just because they signed a license agreement. The license agreement also doesn't cover what you can report about when you find something in said provided code.

There is some precedent when it comes to using, or reporting exploits publicly, but that is really only held up when it comes to data security breaches involving a 3rd party using the exploit to harm another 3rd party, or in rare cases, the 1st party.

Nothing done here seems like it's worthy of a lawsuit. At most, a DMCA claim, which would be the proper step to take for copyright infringement, but even then, the information reported falls under fair use in the way it was reported.

DiTH39d ago

That load of crap you agree on have no legal standing in almost all countries in the world. Its mainly for US. Also they cant sue anyone with the EULA, its main purpose is so THEY dont get sued by the user.

SierraGuy39d ago

Yeah f#ck you Activision piece of sh#t.

Shiro17339d ago

They are not going after the glitch ones. Its the one that leaked the actual warzone image

drpepperdude39d ago

On the Reddit page he commented that he got the image from an inside person which is probably why Activision is going after him to find out who that inside person is.

+ Show (2) more repliesLast reply 39d ago
Dirty_Lemons39d ago (Edited 39d ago )

No it was I! I AM SPARTACUS!

generic-user-name39d ago

I feel like they heavily teased a BR mode would arrive back before launch, what's the big deal? Would be cool if they went Apex style and released it standalone as a F2P though.

TheRealTedCruz39d ago

Nah. Keep it in the base game so the audience can reel them in a bit on the MTs they're already dreaming up.

39d ago
Smokehouse39d ago

The fbi can’t even get into terrorist phones because apple tells them to pound sand. If Reddit gives that information it’s because they want to, not because they have to.

rainslacker39d ago (Edited 39d ago )

I'd hope reddit administrators....or whoever is responsible for reddit, does fight this. It seems like it would be easy enough to get thrown out, because there are plenty of cases of exploits getting information like this, and it is in now way a civil offense. Precedent has been set in numerous cases on the subject.

About the best they can do is prevent people from playing or accessing the content, either by fixing the exploit, or removing the code.

I'm not a big fan of reddit in general, but this seems like a core of how they get information, so it'd make more sense if they stand up for their users on this. If they fight it, and lose, then at least they tried. If they just rolled over, I think it would shake a lot of faith in them, although I doubt it would stop these kinds of things from happening.

Smokehouse39d ago (Edited 39d ago )

Way more to gain in sticking up for your users than kneeling to a company like activision for absolutely no reason. I’d wipe my ass with that subpoena. That’s a slam dunk PR dream and they would be foolish not to use it, I doubt they comply. Who knows if reddit is run by rational people though.. probably some lefty loon police statist who thinks it’s a swell idea lol.

rainslacker39d ago

Wouldn't be the site admins who would get served, or be required to follow the subpoena. That would be on the people who own the site. Like if it were N4G, Christopher wouldn't get served and be required to comply. Law enforcement can't even compel him to comply unless he was given that authority. The owners of the site would be served, and be required to give the information, unless they fight it.

Show all comments (47)
The story is too old to be commented.