Home > News >
An alleged minor accused of promoting and selling “Fortnite” cheats recently petitioned a court to dismiss his case as he is “just a kid.” Fortnite publisher Epic Games clearly disagrees. In response to the motion, the company notes that contracts with minors may be enforceable, noting that the defendant’s cheating activity continued despite the lawsuit.
Game publisher Epic Games has taken a tough stance against Fortnite cheaters.
In addition to banning people from gambling, he has also filed lawsuits against several people who promoted or sold cheats online.
One of the most recent lawsuits targets a popular YouTuber named CBV, who was sued by Epic Games in June. The game company is pursuing the minor (referred to as CB in the complaint) with various claims, including copyright infringement and breach of the DMCA’s anti-circumvention provision.
While many children would be terrified of a lawsuit like this, CBV he didn’t seem impressed. In a YouTube video where he explained the situation last month, the 14-year-old said that he would no longer make Fortnite videos. However, he was far from apologetic.
“Fuck epic games. I mean, at least they can’t go after my channel anymore. I will never make another video. But if they really want to come at my neck for 100k, then they can fuck up their brand on their own,” CBV said.
The alleged cheater defended himself and responded by filing a motion to dismiss in federal court in North Carolina. Among other things, his attorneys pointed out that the court has no jurisdiction over this client and that requiring a minor to defend himself in another state would be unreasonable.
This week, Epic responded to this motion, arguing that the case should continue.
Among other things, the game’s publisher points out that CBV did not stop its cheating activities after the lawsuit was filed. Rather, Epic claims that the defendant made another cheat video on a separate channel and registered a new domain to sell cheats.
“Defendant continues to develop and sell cheat software specifically targeting Epic and Fortnite. In fact, the defendant has created a new website located at
Epic, which does not mention the name of the new channel, tells the court that the defendant used it to promote his cheats. He posted a video titled “Fortnite AIMBOT / WALLHACKS / ** LIVE ** (nexuscheats)”, while answering questions and mentioning that he has a very good lawyer.
“Defendant failed to stop his infringing conduct after receiving notice of Epic’s lawsuit and retaining legal counsel,” Epic writes. “In this 87-minute video, the defendant announced that it was the ‘first time he had broadcast since I was sued.’ . . .’ He then went live logging into Fortnite and demonstrating the cheats of him as he played.”
The video has now been removed after Epic sent out a DMCA notice. However, according to the game’s publisher, this shows that the teaching activities are not over.
While Epic’s response focuses on the continued cheating, the main issue is whether there is a reason to drop the case. The defense argued that the EULA and TOS, which prohibit cheating activities, are unenforceable because CBV is minor. But Epic disagrees.
“His arguments that he is immune from those consequences, including his assertion that this Court has no jurisdiction over him because ‘he is a child,’ are without merit,” Epic tells the Court.
According to Epic, not all contracts with minors are automatically terminated. There are exceptions, which you think apply here. Furthermore, this “childhood defense” does not apply, because the alleged cheater also reaped the benefits of these deals.
According to Epic’s response brief, the defendant was well aware of the potentially illegal nature of his activities, having been sued, banned, and targeted with repeated DMCA notices, but continued nonetheless.
“Not only did he continue to use his access to Fortnite to cheat in-game after receiving the complaint, but he continued to post videos promoting and endorsing his cheating software in violation of Epic’s rights under Copyright Law. , which are the subject of this lawsuit and the terms of the agreements that give Defendant access to Fortnite in the first place.”
Based on these and other arguments, Epic says the motion to dismiss should be denied. The company also believes there is specific jurisdiction to pursue the case in North Carolina, even though the defendant is from Illinois.
If the court decides that there are insufficient grounds to establish jurisdiction, Epic requests a limited discovery in order to find more evidence. Alternatively, the game publisher requests to transfer the case to Central
District of Illinois, where the alleged cheater resides.
A copy of Epic Games’ response to Defendant’s motion to dismiss is available here (pdf).