Epic Games filed a few lawsuits in October 2017 against two huge cheaters who hacked Fortnite. One 14-year-old boy is in the center of the controversy.
The evidence being used as an attempt to dismiss the suit is a letter boy’s mother.
Epic is standing their ground and has refuted the claims while also seeking a default judgment in the case.
The mother’s letter has been posted in full on TorrentFreak. She claims there is no proof that there were modifications or profit loss. She cites their licensing agreement, saying she did not consent to the agreement, and her son, as a minor could not:
"Use of Software Applications is available only to persons who can enter into legally binding contracts under applicable law. If you are a minor, i.e. under the age of 18 years, not competent or otherwise do not have the capacity to enter into a legally binding contract without the consent or assistance of another person, you may use website only under the supervision of a parent or legal guardian, as applicable, who agrees to be bound by this EULA."
She also alleges that Epic illegally released his name as well. She writes in her letter:
"Furthermore, Epic Games, INC has released the defendants name publicly, therefore allowing news articles and different online publications to obtain his name and in turn release additional information. Referencing State of Delaware House Bill No. 64 it is illegal to release under age individuals' personal information by any agencies. Epic Games INC is in complete violation of this as well as other individual websites and news reporting agencies."
Epic’s responded, saying the claims are “irrelevant” or incorrect. Epic also stated, referring to the argument surrounding the boy being a minor that, “[this] alleges that Epic has failed to state a claim for breach of contract under North Carolina law. This is not correct.”
Epic used as an example a 2008 case, in which four high school students sued a software company for copyright infringement. The suit was blocked because the user agreement was considered a valid contract they had agreed too.
While an ‘infancy defense’ was used due to their age, it was also blocked because “the infancy defense [can’t be used] to void their contractual obligations while retaining the benefits of the contract.”
The problem the young man is facing seems to be that he continued to play Fortnite after the supposed cheating. Therefore, because those same principles apply, Epic is trying to obtain a default judgment.
The name of the game is to not cheat on Fortnite, even if the game is free to play. Epic's reasoning may be the cheating effects others experience of the game. Also, if it is considered permissible, then Fortnite would be used and abused left and right by hackers, creating a grim version of the hugely popular game.
Below is an example of a Fortnite hack.
George R.R. Martin confirms ‘The Winds of Winter’ not coming out in 2018