 Log Out 

H O ME TOPICS  MORE  EVENTS  JOBS  E X PE RT ADV I S O R S  C O U R SE S  AB O U T U S  MY AC C O U N T 

E X PE RT SE RV I C E S

The tension between content creators and

game publishers: FaZe Jarvis’s Fortnite ban for
aimbot use Courses
Published 13 November 2019 By: Daniel Kozelko

Sports Law Advisors

Epic Games, the creator of the blockbuster battle royale game Fortnite, has recently
banned a leading content creator for cheating. Jarvis Kaye, also known as FaZe Jarvis,
1
streamed a video to Youtube showing his use of an aimbot in the popular free game.

Upcoming Events
Aimbots are programs used to automatically aim at opponents, allowing the player to kill
others with superhuman accuracy. Jarvis did not use the aimbot in competition play, nor,
he says, did he know that the consequences of his use would be a permanent ban. In a MAY Football Law Digital
statement to the Independent a spokesman for Epic Games said: 21
Conference 2020
We have a zero tolerance policy for the usage of cheat software. When people use
aimbots or other cheat technologies to gain an unfair advantage, they ruin games for JUN Becoming a sports
people who are fairly playing.
2 18
lawyer: starting out

Cheating in online multiplayer games is nothing new. Developers of MMORPGs and

SEP Understand The Rules
MOBAs have been addressing macros and bots for years. However, the explosion of the
17
eSports industry and streaming communities has brought cheating and fairness in Of The Game 2020 -
competitive video games into the limelight. Indeed, responding to the growing threat, in LawInSport Annual
October 2018 Epic Games acquired the Finnish game security company Kamu to step
up the fight against cheats.
Conference
Licenses and the Epic Games End User License LawInSport Podcast
Agreement (EULA)
Prior to the advent of digital distribution service platforms, video games would be
purchased by a player in the form of physical media. As the developer or publisher would
lose much of the control over how that media was used, ownership by the player would
appear to be much more tangible. Today, most players download and play video games
under license from the developer or publisher. The Fortnite EULA makes this clear,
stating that any person downloading and playing the game does so under a license. That
person is granted no title or ownership in the software (clause 1).

The rules that Jarvis is said to have broken are contained in Fortnite’s EULA. Clause 2
explains:
Cookie policy
You may not do or attempt to do any of the following with respect to the Software or
any of its parts: […] (f) create, develop, distribute, or use any unauthorised software
programs to gain advantage in any online or other game modes; […] (i) behave in a
manner which is detrimental to the enjoyment of the Software by other users as
intended by Epic, in Epic’s sole judgment, including but not limited to the following –
[…] running or using methods which are not authorized by Epic and which interfere
with the outcome and/or the course of the Software (including Cheats, bots, scripts,
or mods not expressly authorized by Epic) by giving you and/or another user an
3
advantage over other players who do not use such methods…

The prohibition is clear. An aimbot is unauthorised software, and it provides an

advantage to the using player. Either under clause 2(f) or clause 2(i) Jarvis has breached
the terms of his license. The result of such a breach is equally clear, the license is
terminated (clause 10). Further, (except in limited circumstances) the only remedy is
mandatory arbitration of the dispute (clause 12) under the license governed by the law of
the State of North Carolina (clause 11). Also, it is also worth noting in passing that Jarvis’
entitlement to create content based on Fortnite arises under the fan content policy
incorporated into the now terminated license.

What Happens Now?

In permanently banning Jarvis, Epic Games has revoked his license and made clear it
will not grant him another. As he has no property in the game, and no contract with Epic
Games for the use of the software, he has no way to compel it to offer him a new license.
Jarvis could arbitrate under the arbitration clause, but it is unclear how this would assist.
Jarvis admits his breach, and the termination was provided for by the terms of the
agreement. While the EULA does not specify that no future licenses will be offered to
persons breaking its terms, the position was tolerably clear. The license was terminated,
and Epic Games is entitled to refuse to offer further licenses as a matter of freedom of
contract.

This issue is one step prior to the typical sports law issue of regulation and access to
competitions. This is not simply Epic Games refusing Jarvis access to compete, which
would be comparable to a regulator in traditional sports refusing to readmit to a
competition an athlete previously found to have doped. Epic Games is refusing Jarvis
access to its property. It is unclear whether the industry is anywhere near ready to begin
regulating access to software. Emergent eSports regulators are typically focused on
regulating competitions, and are yet to indicate how far into the management of the
consumer relationship they are willing to go. It is similarly unclear how far developers and
publishers are willing to go in giving up proprietary and copyright control of their games
for the good of regulation.
Of course, in the world of content creators and professional eSports players, resolution
may come in the form of pressure from the fans. This occurred recently with Ng Wai
“blitzchung” Chung, who was initially refused prize money and banned for a year from
professional play of Hearthstone for voicing his views on the febrile political situation in
Hong. It now appears that pressure from fans on Blizzard, the developer of Hearthstone,
has led to a reduction in the punishment (he will be paid and receive a ban for six
4
months ). It may be that similar pressure from fans on Epic Games will resolve the Jarvis
issue. Other content creators (Ninja being a high-profile example) have already voiced
their concerns.

The Fundamental Issue

However, this case raises a fundamental issue for the gaming and content creator
community. Individuals such as Jarvis build their popularity and empire on the shifting
sands of a license that can be easily revoked by a developer or publisher. Lacking clear
regulation, or a move towards more substantial contractual relationships, it seems
disputes of this kind will become a regular occurrence.

References
1†Faze Jarvis aimbot Video that got him banned, youtube.com, 3 Nov 2019, last
accessed 12 Nov 2019,

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZO4eMGK638c

2†‘Fortnite pro Jarvis banned for using cheat software’, bbc.com, 5 November 2019, last
accessed 12 Nov 2019,

https://www.bbc.com/news/technology-50300842

3†Fornite End User License Agreement, https://www.epicgames.com/fortnite/en-US/eula

(last accessed 12 Nov 2019)

4†‘Blizzard bosses reduce gamer's ban and release prize money’, bbc.co.uk, 12 Oct
2019, last accessed 12 Nov 2019, https://www.bbc.com/news/newsbeat-50026401

Copyright notice
This work was written for and first published on LawInSport.com (unless otherwise
stated) and the copyright is owned by LawInSport Ltd. Permission is granted to make
digital or hard copies of this work (or part, or abstracts, of it) for personal use provided
copies are not made or distributed for profit or commercial advantage, and provided that
all copies bear this notice and full citation on the first page (which should include the
URL, company name (LawInSport), article title, author name, date of the publication and
date of use) of any copies made. Copyright for components of this work owned by parties
other than LawInSport must be honoured.

Views 4968

Tags: Anti-Corruption | Athlete Welfare | Esports | Fortnite

Related Articles
An Open Letter to Athletes and Athlete Groups: Global Athlete Update
eSports: recent and future changes to the rapidly changing eSports ecosystem - Panel
discussion to take place at Understand the Rules of the Game 2019
 Cheating in video games – lessons from Blizzard’s successful case against cheat and
bot developer
Sports governance - the year in review 2018/19

Author

Daniel Kozelko
Daniel practises from 39 Essex Chambers and has a particular interest in eSports
issues.

He has significant experience in commercial and civil disputes. This includes assisting in
multi-million pound contract and construction claims in the High Court, in arbitral
proceedings, and appearing in the High Court on civil and regulatory disputes.

Daniel also has an interest in disciplinary proceedings, having worked on a number of

matters for a variety of regulators. Daniel is an avid gamer, with a particular interest in
MMORPGs, grand strategy, and FPSs. He looks forward to bringing his gaming
knowledge to eSports and video game disputes.

daniel.kozelko@39essex.com
Full Profile

Back To Top
Terms and Conditions Cookie Policy Sitemap
Subscribe Announcements

Copyright © LawInSport Limited 2010 - 2020. These pages contain general information only. Nothing in these
pages constitutes legal advice. You should consult a suitably qualified lawyer on any specific legal problem or
matter. The information provided here was accurate as of the day it was posted; however, the law may have
changed since that date. This information is not intended to be, and should not be used as, a substitute for
taking legal advice in any specific situation. LawInSport is not responsible for any actions taken or not taken
on the basis of this information. Please refer to the full terms and conditions on our website.