Activision's Defense Filed in Call of Duty Lawsuit

Activision's Robust Defense in Uvalde Shooting Lawsuit

Activision Blizzard vehemently denies any connection between its Call of Duty franchise and the tragic Uvalde school shooting, asserting its content is constitutionally protected free speech. The company's comprehensive legal response, filed in December, counters claims that the game served as "mass shooter training."

The lawsuit, filed in May 2024 by families of the Robb Elementary victims, alleges the shooter's exposure to Call of Duty's violent content contributed to the May 24, 2022 tragedy. The shooter, an 18-year-old former student, played Call of Duty regularly, including downloading Modern Warfare in November 2021, and used an AR-15 rifle, similar to in-game weaponry. The plaintiffs also implicated Meta (through Instagram) for allegedly facilitating connections between the shooter and firearm manufacturers.

Activision's 150-page defense rejects all allegations, seeking dismissal under California's anti-SLAPP laws. The company emphasizes Call of Duty's status as protected expression under the First Amendment, arguing that criticisms based on "hyper-realistic content" infringe upon this fundamental right.

Supporting its position, Activision submitted expert declarations. Notre Dame professor Matthew Thomas Payne's 35-page statement contextualizes Call of Duty within the established tradition of military realism in film and television, refuting the "training camp" assertion. A 38-page declaration from Patrick Kelly, Call of Duty's head of creative, details the game's development, including the $700 million budget for Call of Duty: Black Ops Cold War.

The Uvalde families have until late February to respond to Activision's extensive filings. The outcome remains uncertain, but the case highlights the ongoing debate surrounding the link between violent video games and mass shootings.