Activision Blizzard complaint could fail - Publisher wants to investigate ethic violations of the plaintiff

In the case of the great discrimination of a California civil rights authority against Activion Blizzard, there is a new turn. After there are more complaints against the COD publisher in the room, Activision Blizzard is now reporting to the first compliant federal authority, the California Department of Fair Employment and Housing (Dfeh). Here you will learn more about the new development and how it came.

Current development and complaints

It s about it: Activision Blizzard was sued in July by the California Civil Rights Authority Dfeh for sexual discrimination . Now the publisher has requested more time to investigate alleged ethics violations of the authority in order to be able to exclude the Dfeh thereby from the case. How Kotaku reports, this could tear the DFEH case .

How did this new development happen? There are now several complaints against Activision Blizzard. In July, the Dfeh wanted to push the publisher to promote a ubiquitous working culture as in a student compound , in which women were continuously exposed to sexual harassment, unevenly paid and received much worse career opportunities.

Activision Blizzard sued by California Further complaints: In a second suit in September, the employees even threw the publisher union puncture and intimidation . In the same month, a third lawsuit was added. This time complained the EEOC (Equal Employment Opportunity Commission). Again it was about sexual harassment and discrimination . In the latter case, Activision Blizzard agreed to pay 18 million US dollars to those affected, with the publisher further denying misconduct.

Application for intervention

However, the DFEH, the authority, which first has complained, recently submitted an application for intervention against the agreement between the EEOC and Activision Blizzard. The reason has been stated that the comparison conditions have great damage to the Dfeh s own case.

Why that? The Dfeh had concerns about a clause in comparison: This requires that Activision Blizzard should delete all allegations for sexual harassment from the personal files of the victims that get compensation. In the application of the DFEH, it is shown that these entries are proof of evidence, which are crucial for their own procedure, which are likely to be destroyed by the clause.

The EEOC defends itself with its own allegations: The EEOC then threw the DFEH according to Kotaku several ethic violations. It deals with two lawyers, which, as the portal buffed reports, previously worked in the litigation against Activision Blizzard leader for the EEOC and now worked for the Dfeh. According to Buffed, this change could have been violated against California rules.

Activision Blizzard uses allegations

The allegations made by the EEOC against the Dfeh uses Activision Blizzard now to apply for a suspension of its own negotiation with the DFEH. In the additional time, the publishers wanted to investigate the allegations against the DFEH and exclude the authority from the discrimination case - if the violations of tributaries should.

Application Ex Parte set: Activision Blizzard asked the application to describe how Kotaku describes ex Parte . This means that it is particularly urgent and due to a regular legal proceedings could skip. As a response, this is done that the DFEH also submitted its request for intervention before Expand. This was rejected by the court.

Other allegations against the Dfeh: In addition to the allegations similar to those of the EEOC, Activision Blizzard also criticizes the use of the DFEH with the employees of the publisher according to Kotaku. According to Activision Blizzard, the Authority warned the employees to use the right to take external lawyers to cooperate exclusively with the DFEH instead.

So much is clear: from the discrimination suit, where it was about the working conditions of the employees at Activision Blizzard, a complicated legal braid has now become, in which the various parties are interdependent.

What do you think of this new turn?