Riot Games Rules Update Highlights A Flaw In How Developers Tackle Toxic Players
A welcome change to Riot’s TOS is more complicated than it looks.
Last week, Riot Games announced a new policy restricting what content creators can say when producing work involving its games. It’s the latest in a recent series of sweeping changes designed to combat toxicity, and one that could help rehabilitate the reputation of games like League of Legends, which is known for a hostile player base. But at the same time, it could risk punishing marginalized creators who already face harsh scrutiny.
Riot Games laid out its new rules in a blog post. The post goes over four updates, including clearer language around selling accounts and stream sniping. But the largest change comes first: “off-Platform conduct” and behavior connected to our IP is now subject to our Terms of Service,” according to Riot. That means that when making streams, videos, and other content about Riot’s titles, creators can still be punished for breaking the terms. For example, infractions like using hate speech or harassing other players were previously covered if they happened over in-game voice chat, but now they’ll be grounds for punishment even if they only appear in voiceover. Riot did not immediately respond to Inverse’s request for comment.
Riot Games’ attempts to clean up their games’ communities could have unintended consequences.
The changes from Riot Games follow a few other announcements aimed at cleaning up its games’ communities. This May, Valorant streamer Taylor Morgan shared an incident of particularly disturbing harassment and threats from another player during a game. After going viral, the post prompted comment from Valorant executive producer Anna Donlon, and a considerably stronger statement in a later video. Riot vowed to implement much stricter rules against abusive behavior, up to and including permanent bans.
It’s a welcome update. Hate speech has been allowed to fester in streams and YouTube videos for a long time now. Consistent toxic behavior from some creators has even inspired their fans to engage in harassment campaigns, like the one that began with attacks on employees of consultancy firm Sweet Baby Inc. Demanding that creators follow Riot’s TOS to make content means the developer can prevent its own games from becoming rallying points for hateful mobs, which is good for both players and the company’s own, often unsavory, public image.
However, the same rules could potentially be turned on creators acting in good faith. Riot Games’ TOS specifically prohibits “violating any law, rule or regulation by or while using the Riot Services,” and “engaging in any behavior which is objectionable or offensive to other players, including communications or conduct that is … sexually explicit.”
A new Twitch policy required discussion of LGBTQ+ rights to be labeled as sensitive before changing the policy due to backlash.
While those may sound like reasonable restrictions on their face, they rely on murky language around what it means to be objectionable, and could leave communities targeted by unjust laws in violation of Riot’s TOS unintentionally. In November, Twitch announced new guidelines requiring certain types of video to be labeled as sensitive content. Among them were “streams focused on discussing topics like gender, race, sexuality, or religion in a polarizing or inflammatory manner” and any discussion of “reproductive rights, LGBTQ+ rights, or immigration.” As many streamers pointed out, those rules would require people discussing their own reproductive health, immigration status, sexuality, or gender identity to be labeled sensitive. Later that week, Twitch updated the rules to allow discussions based on streamers’ “lived experience” as long as they weren’t the focus of the stream.
Twitch’s solution still leaves room for marginalized streamers to potentially be penalized, and Riot’s TOS could do the same. There’s no shortage of people who would claim that the same discussions singled out by Twitch’s policy are “objectionable,” and thus grounds for punishment by Riot as well.
Bad actors and discriminatory laws could get in the way of Riot’s efforts to curb toxicity.
Even the provision against “violating any law” could be misused. Across the U.S., laws banning discussions of homosexuality are being enacted to silence the LGBTQ community. Even worse, the Kids Online Safety Act currently moving through Congress would make it illegal to allow the spread of material that could harm children — using an extremely ill-defined definition of harm that would deem any LGBTQ content to be sexually explicit. The bill’s sponsor, Marsha Blackburn, has even identified “protecting minor children from the transgender” as one of KOSA’s aims. If the bill is signed into law, any discussion of LGBTQ issues could thus become unlawful.
The games industry has struggled to combat hate speech, coordinated harassment, and far-right radicalization for years. If Riot’s new policy can help root out those toxic elements from its games’ communities, it’s undoubtedly a good thing. But at the same time, companies like Riot need to take care not to punish already marginalized players through unclear policies, or by allowing bad-faith definitions of what’s objectionable to harm the vulnerable. If developers really want to improve conditions for their players, they need to be clear about how they plan to not only punish abusers, but also protect their targets.
