Remember that clown who sued Sony because they banned him from PlayStation Network? Some B.S. about it abridging his First Amendment rights? Yeah, a federal judged tossed that suit in a hot minute.
Earlier this year, Erik Estavillo got thumbed for being a turd while playing Resistance: Fall of Man. So he sued Sony, alleging the ban constituted theft in the form of depriving him of services for which he had paid. Estavillo also said something about being an agoraphobic, which means his fear of large crowds left him only with venues such as PSN for being able to safely interact with others. He also had the fantastic smarts to represent himself, no doubt contributing to the speedy judgment of his complaint.
Estavillo's $US55,000 claim was thrown out by Judge Ronald M. Whyte in federal court for the Northern District of California. He ruled there was no plausible First Amendment claim in the case. Sony all along maintained that First Amendment protections have no relevance to the PSN, which is a private accommodation.
Some others have inspected the ruling and found that the judge based his decision on a rejection of some sort of legal concept called the "company town analogy." Perhaps. I think he employed the "this lawsuit is total crap" standard, which usually has primacy. Or should.
Judge Able to Resist PSN Lawsuit [Game Politics]