Roblox, an online gaming platform that supposedly fosters creativity and connection among children and teens, harbors a darker underbelly that has harmed countless young users for years. Families nationwide are coming forward with stories of how predators, explicit content, and exploitation pervade this digital playground. The attorneys at Anapol Weiss have filed four lawsuits against Roblox on behalf of children from various parts of the U.S. (Florida, Indiana, New Jersey, Texas) who were sexually exploited on the Roblox platform. Anapol Weiss is investigating hundreds of similar cases and will be filing many more lawsuits in the upcoming months.
Shareholder Alexandra Walsh and nationally renowned abuse attorney Kristen Gibbons Feden are spearheading our efforts to hold Roblox and related companies accountable, bringing extensive experience to this high-stakes litigation. We are demanding justice for our clients and seeking to hold Roblox and other companies accountable.
Perhaps, but simply reporting content does not prove that they are aware of it. Their report system could be automated, and it might not flag those specific reports for human review, or it could have been lost or dropped. I don’t know, I am just particularly curious as to how lawyers will be able to prove beyond any doubt that whoever at Roblox actually knew about the problem and willingly let it happen. I don’t doubt that Roblox was certainly negligent, but I wouldn’t know for certainty that they could be labelled as “allowing” as opposed to “neglecting to take action.”
Also, under US law, ignorance is not a defense in both civil and criminal court. It does not matter if you did not know it was illegal, it does not matter if you did not know it was happening, if you provide an avenue and forum for illegal activity you are culpable at minimum. The corporate shield will prevent any criminal charges against individuals, unfortunately, but the civil liability is pretty evident. It occurred on their platform which means that they did not take sufficient steps to prevent or discourage the practice in the first place. It should not have been a thing that was present to report or react to in the first place. It falls into the same vein as doing background checks and personality evaluations on prospective teachers and daycare workers. Doing 0 checks to validate that these people are not a danger and then claiming ignorance when they touch children in the broom closet is a nonstarter too.
This is a civil case, not criminal. It isn’t a matter of “did they do this”. It’s a matter of “how much are they responsible for this”.