Litigation at the Digital Frontier
On behalf of a Maryland family, Jenner Law has filed a landmark lawsuit against Roblox Corporation in the U.S. District Court for Maryland, advancing an important trend in litigation against video game manufacturers for alleged addictive design and marketing practices targeting minors. This case is likely to become part of a national multi district effort before the Judicial Panel on Multi district Litigation (JPML), demonstrating both its legal significance and broad relevance.
The Factual Landscape: Modern Gaming and Child Welfare
The essence of the case is a familiar and deeply concerning scenario: a minor plaintiff allegedly addicted to Roblox, suffering significant emotional, behavioral, and physical harm with consequences for their future and family. Roblox is an online platform where people can create, share, and play games made by other users. It’s not just a single game, but a digital universe with millions of different user-created experiences.
We assert in the complaint that Roblox’s design leverages psychological triggers, stimulating reward centers and monetizing sustained play through in-game purchases—too often without sufficient warnings or robust parental controls. Supporting allegations cite years of research on adolescent gaming behavior, showing that repeated gameplay may activate dopamine pathways similar to those affected by gambling and substance use. These changes can lead to clinical “gaming disorder,” as recognized by the World Health Organization and leading psychiatric groups. Alleged real-world impacts include impaired academic performance, social withdrawal, emotional instability, and financial harm from unchecked in-game purchases.
Targeting the Industry: Product Liability and Negligence Claims
Our lawsuit relies on classic product liability and negligence theories:
(1) Strict Product Liability (Design Defect): Claims Roblox is defectively designed, using features such as microtransactions and reward systems intentionally built to be addictive, especially for minors.
(2) Strict Product Liability (Failure to Warn): Asserts Roblox failed to warn users and guardians of the risks of addiction and related harms.
(3) Negligence (Design and Failure to Warn): Argues reasonable protective steps—including stronger parental controls and age verification—were both feasible and standard, but Roblox prioritized profit over consumer safety.
The lawsuit seeks compensation for emotional distress, medical bills, lasting impairment, economic losses, and punitive damages for alleged reckless disregard for child welfare.
The National Canvas: MDL Petition and Its Significance
Maryland’s case joins a growing number of similar suits nationwide against Roblox, Epic Games (Fortnite), Microsoft/Mojang (Minecraft), and others. Plaintiffs have petitioned the JPML to centralize these actions under 28 U.S.C. § 1407 for coordinated pretrial management. Multidistrict Litigation (MDL) is designed for complex federal lawsuits involving similar facts and legal issues across multiple districts. The process aims to improve efficiency, ensure consistent rulings, and streamline discovery. This emerging field argues for MDL based on:
Defendants’ use of similar psychological strategies across games to maximize microtransactions.
Plaintiffs reporting comparable injuries: addiction, psychological disorders, academic harm, and family disruption.
Common expert testimony regarding child psychology and game design practices
Anticipated uniform defense strategies, including Section 230 and First Amendment defenses. Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act protects companies like Roblox from being held liable for content created by users on their platforms, arguing that they simply provide a venue for user interaction rather than being publishers of that content. The First Amendment defense asserts that video games are recognized as forms of protected expression, meaning companies cannot be sued for the design and distribution of their games simply because they are creative works. These legal strategies make it significantly harder for plaintiffs to hold companies accountable, especially when distinguishing between platform-created and user-generated content
MDL centralization is intended to eliminate duplicative discovery and conflicting decisions, potentially paving the way for industry-wide settlements or resolutions.
Plaintiffs are requesting consolidation in the Eastern District of Pennsylvania, selected for its experience with complex product liability MDLs. The current effort would bring together at least 17 pending cases, all at the preliminary stage, targeting the core manufacturers of Roblox, Fortnite, and Minecraft. This petition focuses specifically on these games, distinguishing itself from a broader, unsuccessful attempt in 2024 to form a video game addiction MDL.
Implications for Consumers and Industry
This lawsuit exemplifies the increasing scrutiny of tech companies whose products permeate daily life, especially for children. The core concern is not simply excessive play, but commercial exploitation of minors’ neurological vulnerabilities. The use of behavioral science and dynamic pricing to boost engagement, often at the expense of children’s wellbeing.
Insufficient parental oversight due to lax controls, age verification, and opaque warning systems.
Barriers to meaningful parental consent and awareness regarding risks associated with these platforms.
Success in this litigation could set transformative legal standards for digital product liability and consumer protection, mirroring shifts from tobacco, pharma, and social media lawsuits. Beyond damages, these actions aim for industry reform: mandatory safety features, transparent warnings, and a move away from profit-at-all-costs engagement.
Litigation That May Reshape Digital Childhood
The Maryland video game addiction litigation signals a broader societal reckoning with tech’s role in child development. As science, legal doctrine, and family awareness respond to the realities of digital childhood, courts may ultimately define new boundaries for corporate accountability and user consent in the age of algorithm-driven entertainment. Whatever the ultimate outcome, this litigation is poised to influence how games are designed, marketed, and managed for minors going forward. For parents, policymakers, and industry leaders alike, vigilance in the digital playground is just as essential as in any physical one.
At Jenner Law, we understand how overwhelming it can feel to take on powerful companies. Our lawyers have led some of the largest national product liability cases, standing up for people harmed by unsafe drugs, medical devices, and consumer products. We know what it takes to navigate complex lawsuits, and we bring that same dedication and proven experience to families here at home. When you trust us with your case, you can feel confident that you have a team that has successfully fought – and won – for clients across the country.