---

On December 5th, Mr. Chomiac de Sas had the pleasure of speaking again with Arnaud Dumourier about esports law, particularly the regulations governing player contracts in competitive video games.

Read the full interview:

This interview complements our previous articles on this topic in Lex Inside:

• What legal protection is available for video games?
• The legal framework for esports sponsorship

Law & Esports – The Legal Status of Esports Players

Historically, the service contract became the dominant contractual form in esports before any specific legal recognition of the sector. Lacking a dedicated legal framework, esports organizations—companies or associations—entered into service contracts with players, often with the latter operating as sole traders or through personal companies, to organize their participation in competitions and related services (promotion, representation, image rights transfer, etc.).

This highly flexible service-based approach allowed the parties to freely define the obligations, terms of performance, and termination of the contractual relationship, adapting to the economic and organizational uncertainties of the sector. However, this contractual freedom also masks a significant legal vulnerability: many service contracts exhibit clear signs of subordination and economic dependence, exposing these entities to an increasing risk of reclassification as employment contracts, with serious civil, social, and criminal consequences (social security contributions, penalties for undeclared work, etc.) if this relationship is recognized by the courts.

Faced with these uncertainties, the French legislature intervened in 2016 to establish a specific legal framework for esports employment contracts, creating a fixed-term contract tailored to professional video game players through Article 102 of the Law for a Digital Republic.

Largely inspired by contracts for athletes, this law formally regulates the employer-player relationship: the contract must be in writing, specify the identity of the parties, the duration (minimum one season, maximum five years), and include the obligations and remuneration, while clubs must obtain administrative approval to hire under this type of contract. This legislation aimed to protect players and structure the sector while recognizing the specific nature of competitions.

However, in practice, the use of this contract remains limited, as its rigidity, its social cost, and certain burdensome obligations (particularly those related to labor law) often make it unsuitable for the economic realities of many organizations, which still prefer to use independent contractors.

In this contemporary context, the status of service provider remains preferred, while a special case arises for minor players, for whom employment is strictly regulated: the hiring of minors under 16 years of age is in principle prohibited and can only be done under very strict conditions (administrative authorization, respect for the rules of protection of minors), under penalty of nullity of the contract or sanctions.

Law & Esports – What Activities, Missions, and Services Are Provided to Players?

The contractual situations of esports players vary considerably, depending on their skill level, reputation, and especially the events or competitions in which they participate, such as top-level closed leagues like the LEC (League of Legends European Championship).

Within these highly structured frameworks, players’ obligations extend far beyond simply participating in matches: they are required to adhere to a precise schedule, comply with the rules imposed by the publisher and the league, and actively participate in the club’s activities.

This participation includes not only official competitions but also related activities essential to the team’s visibility, such as attending promotional events, trade shows, fan meet-and-greets, or communication campaigns organized by the club or its partners.

Furthermore, the exploitation of players’ images plays a central role in esports contractual relationships, particularly for players competing in high-profile tournaments. Their image is frequently associated with advertising contracts, sponsorships, or brand partners of the club, whether through marketing campaigns, social media content, or public appearances.

Contracts then include the transfer or licensing of image rights, sometimes very broad, integrated into the primary relationship between the player and the organization.

Law & Esports – Complex Esports Contract Clauses

The structure of esports player compensation reflects the diversity of statuses and economic models within the sector. Depending on the contract, compensation can take the form of a monthly fee, performance bonuses linked to competition results, revenue from tournament winnings, or indirect benefits (such as coverage of accommodation, travel, equipment, or living expenses).

In addition to these elements, there are significant physical and logistical constraints: provision of training facilities (gaming houses or dedicated centers), supply of computer equipment, organization of daily training sessions, frequent travel abroad for international competitions, visa management, and administrative support.

When these constraints are strictly organized and imposed by the organization, they strongly influence the player’s activity and can constitute further evidence of a subordinate relationship, particularly relevant when analyzing the risk of reclassifying service contracts as employment contracts.

Furthermore, contracts frequently include specific “cheerleader” clauses, imposing obligations of behavior, positive attitude, and loyalty on players towards the club, sponsors, or partners, both during competitions and in their public and online lives.

These clauses are closely linked to the suitability of contracts to the requirements of tournament organizers, who often impose strict standards regarding communication, discipline, image, and compliance with regulations (particularly in closed leagues).

In this context, the terms of use of players’ personal social media accounts become a central contractual issue: obligations to promote partners, restrictions on certain content, prior approval of posts, or penalties for violations.

If these obligations are excessively detailed or controlled, they increase the club’s intrusion into the player’s personal life and, once again, fuel the legal debate on the true nature of the contractual relationship.

Law & Esports – Risks related to esports player contracts

Recent court decisions affecting the esports sector have focused on analyzing player contracts under labor law. Referring to the usual applicable criteria, French judges have issued several rulings recognizing the reclassification of player contracts as employment contracts.

In a judgment dated March 27, 2024, the Paris Judicial Court reclassified a service contract for an esports player as an employment contract. (Paris Judicial Court, March 27, 2024 – No. 22/02668).

On June 13, 2024 (Case No. 22/03196), the Rouen Court of Appeal ruled that an esports player could be hired on a fixed-term contract for a temporary increase in staff, even if their club did not have “esports” accreditation, while also noting that this lack of accreditation could not be used against the player.

In a ruling issued on June 18, 2025 (Metz Court of Appeal, Case No. 23/02325), the Metz Court of Appeal reclassified a “gamer agreement” as an employment contract.

The issue of transfers and changes of esports players remains particularly complex in the absence of a unified framework comparable to that of traditional sports. Transfer mechanisms are currently governed primarily by contracts between players and organizations, as well as by the regulations of publishers and competition organizers, which may impose transfer windows, termination conditions, or compensation.

This situation creates significant heterogeneity in practices and legal uncertainty for players, particularly when non-compete clauses, extended notice periods, or buyouts are included. These contractual arrangements, when they excessively restrict a player’s professional freedom, can be challenged under labor law or competition law, and constitute a major point of concern when analyzing the legal status of esports players.

At the same time, issues related to player health and the problems of doping, hacking, and corruption are playing an increasingly important role in esports regulation. Intensified training, frequent competitions, and media pressure expose players to physical risks (musculoskeletal disorders, eye strain) and psychological risks (stress, burnout), necessitating appropriate prevention and monitoring measures.

Added to this are the requirements for competition integrity, with strict rules aimed at combating digital or pharmacological doping, cheating practices, match-fixing, and attacks on computer systems.

Tournament organizers are therefore implementing stricter controls on players—technical, disciplinary, and sometimes medical checks—the acceptance of which is often a prerequisite for participation in competitions. These control mechanisms, essential to the credibility of esports, nevertheless strengthen the framework for the activity of players and contribute to the legal debate on the real nature of their relationship with structures and organizers.

The beginning of 2026 offered us the opportunity to speak for the first time within the Master’s program in Digital Law – specializing in “Intangible and Video Game Law” at the University of Reims Champagne-Ardenne.

As part of the Master 2 curriculum, we delivered two courses dedicated to the legal issues related to digital law, on the one hand, and to video game and esports law, on the other.

Having frequently addressed these topics, we were delighted to be able to discuss contemporary and technical subjects with future legal professionals: video game ownership, the death of online streamers and platform regulation, social media addiction, Twitch and nudity, blocking pornographic websites and digital identity, Francis Sport and esports, etc.

Master 2 – Intangible and Video Game Law

Led by Professor Geoffray Brunaux, the Master’s program in “Digital Law,” specializing in “Intangible Creations and Video Games,” is designed to train students in the legal rules applicable to creative digital activities.

The Master’s program focuses on teaching the fundamental rules specific to all digital activities (e-commerce law, personal data law, digital criminal law, etc.), complemented by an understanding of the legal issues in the video game industry and new virtual worlds (video games, metaverse, virtual/augmented reality).

Among the subjects taught are Civil and Commercial Contracts: Contractual Techniques, Digital Platform Law, Advanced Literary and Artistic Property, Applied Civil Law (law of persons and property law), and the History of the Video Game Market.

Legal issues of digital activities

Our intervention entitled “Legal Issues of Digital Technology” aims to highlight the way in which the development of digital technologies renews and complicates existing legal frameworks, by confronting students with concrete situations encountered by digital stakeholders (businesses, platforms, users, public authorities).

Through practical examples, our presentation addressed several central issues in digital law:

• the different regimes for online communication,
• the liability of platforms and social networks,
• interactions with press law,
• the challenges related to intellectual property in the digital environment, and
• the obligations arising from the GDPR regarding the protection of personal data.

Through practical and current examples, students were able to see the full range of digital challenges facing professional sectors.

• The legal and judicial framework of social networks: the example of X (Twitter);
• The pornography industry and its role in creating a digital identity;
• The rights of influencers;
• The regulation of athletes’ image rights;
• Artistic creation using or with generative AI tools.

Video game law and esports

Presentation & Examples. The video game and esports law course aimed to introduce students and professionals to the main legal frameworks concerning:

• video games as a cultural and digital industry;
• esports competitions and their structure;
• contractual relationships, legal status, and protection of stakeholders (publishers, players, organizers).

Law, Video Games, and Esports. Conspicuously absent from legislation, video games are only given a single, discreet definition within the French General Tax Code:

Art. 220 terdecies of the French General Tax Code. A video game is defined as any recreational software made available to the public on a physical medium or online, incorporating elements of artistic and technological creation, offering one or more users a series of interactions based on a scripted storyline or simulated situations, and presented in the form of animated images, with or without sound.

However, its legal framework has been the subject of much debate in recent years, initially driven by the recognition of copyright, then by the application of the unitary regime for software, before finally being addressed in 2009 under a distributive regime.

Similarly, the legal framework for competitive video gaming—esports—has also been defined within the Internal Security Code, which prohibits the term “esport,” as it is semantically too close to a discipline whose legal framework was specifically denied to esports law.

Perspectives and challenges of the sector. This module of law, linked to a contemporary and particularly rich sector, addresses a variety of cross-cutting themes: the ownership of video games and, by extension, digital products and services, freedom of expression in media works, the conditions for organizing esports events, etc.

Our course concluded with an analysis of various themes associated with the contemporary evolution of the video game and esports sectors:

• The links between sports and esports;
• Competitive video games and money laundering networks;
• The health of underage esports players;
• Esports & Esportainment
• Dark patterns & video games

Finally, and most importantly, we thank all the Master’s students for their participation and involvement in these seminars. Thank you, “Francis Sport”.

Committed to teaching and training professionals, Mr. Chomiac de Sas has been teaching courses and seminars in disciplines combining law and new technologies for over ten years at various universities, higher education institutions, and law schools.

Find all our presentations in our dedicated section.

Double Degree in Law and International Business

For several years, the Catholic University of Lille has partnered with IESEG, offering students a dual degree in International Business and Law. This program aims to provide students with a solid foundation in management and law, combining legal expertise with an understanding of strategic business challenges in an international environment.

Within this framework, Ms. Chomiac de Sas participates in the supervision of Master 2 theses on topics related to the financial aspects of new technologies: digitization, cybersecurity, intellectual property, advertising, sports and esports, communication, online broadcasting, etc.

Business and Digital Law – Dissertations 2025

In 2025, we had the opportunity to support several students in developing their Master’s theses on fascinating topics related to digital law:

• “The Streaming Revolution: Adaptation Strategies for Traditional Media”
• “The Impact of the June 2023 Influencer Law”
• “AI in the Music Industry: Between Innovation, Copyright, and Valuation”
• “The Repression of Counterfeiting in the Luxury Sector”

We congratulate the students who successfully completed these complex projects within the constraints and limitations of their Master’s degree programs.

The streaming revolution: Adaptation strategy for traditional media

The jury’s favorite was this fascinating topic, which contrasts the influence and experience of traditional media outlets such as TF1, Canal+, and M6 with the new online mass media and their massive audiences: Twitch, YouTube, Netflix, etc.

The shift in the consumption of traditional audiovisual media has occurred through the concept of video-on-demand (VOD) services, encouraged or compelled by evolving consumer behavior.

The legal framework governing this evolution of practices has been a slow process, combining national and EU regulations and grappling with the historical tension between the regulations governing audiovisual communication and those governing online public communication.

It now seems that far from a replacement or a monopoly for the provision of audiovisual content, all the historical and recent players seem to be turning towards a hybrid model.

The impact of the Influencers Law of June 2023

Perhaps too long neglected by audiovisual and advertising content regulators, commercial and marketing influencer activities have largely capitalized on the power and functionalities offered by social media, shifting a portion of the advertising industry towards these new personalities/models/promoters/producers/actors/artists.

The abuses and excesses gradually observed in the impressive growth of influencer marketing have finally attracted the attention of regulatory authorities: ARPP, DGCCRF, and other entities. In this context, Law No. 2023-451 of June 9, 2023, aimed at regulating commercial influence and combating influencer abuses on social media, deserves particular attention: is it a compilation of pre-existing provisions governing communication acting as an institutional response, advertising, and its regulations, or is it a comprehensive piece of legal thought resolving major challenges related to influencer activity?

“Behind the appearance of strengthened regulation, some see it more as a political response than a genuine legal advance. The fact that it relies heavily on existing provisions raises questions about its practical effectiveness and the reality of the changes it introduces.”

AI in the music industry: between innovation, copyright and valuation

Intellectual property, confronted with technological tools that can limit or circumvent authors’ protection, is entering a new chapter with the emergence and widespread adoption of generative artificial intelligence (GAI) models.

Issues affecting the protection of industry stakeholders—performing artists, singers, composers, collective management organizations, etc.—are complicated by a still limited mastery of existing AI tools.

Moreover, and in summary, these new technological tools and their impact on the artistic sector have been the subject of past legal analyses designed to guide professionals toward solutions: the training of AI tools, the intellectual property rights of music and associated artists, the obligations of providers/users, and national, EU, and international regulations.   

“Crackdown on counterfeiting in the luxury sector”

A prime target for counterfeiters, the luxury sector is forced to continually adapt to new practices and methods used to lure its clientele into the market with counterfeit products.

The protection of brands, products, and services in this sector relies on a multitude of sources and legal bases that extend beyond the strict framework of intellectual property. This protection is naturally complemented by the penalties incurred under both civil and criminal law.

In a context marked by the increasing digitalization of services, particularly regarding intermediation between buyers and sellers, the question of the responsibility of online sales platforms and their necessary or desired involvement in the fight against counterfeiting re-emerges from a specific and interesting perspective.

While luxury players naturally seek greater involvement from communication companies, the latter, on the contrary, wish to limit their obligations to control offers and services in order not to fall into the status of co-perpetrator of the offences.

In an article by Zoé Keunebroek for the media outlet Les E-novateurs, Ms. Chomiac de Sas offered her analysis of new forms of video game consumption and the impact of its dematerialization.

Drawing on their respective experiences, Olivier Mauco, president of the European Video Game Observatory, Laurent Duplouy, head of the multimedia department at the National Library of France (BnF), and Ross Scott, initiator of the #StopKillingGames campaign, described the consequences of the fully digital approach guiding the policies of contemporary video game publishers.

Read the full article, “Will I Still Be Able to Play Tomorrow? When Video Games Go Digital,” and a summary of our discussion with Ms. Keunebroek.

Intellectual property: Ownership and usage rights of video games

In summary, purchasing a game is equivalent to purchasing a license to use the game. The studio will always retain ownership of all the elements that make up the game and constitute its intellectual property. Therefore, it cannot be considered a sale of the game itself; otherwise, one could duplicate and sell any game purchased.

An additional point to consider is that if you purchase the physical medium on which the game is stored, you become the owner not of the game itself, but of the physical medium, which you can then resell. The system is similar for books, music, and other artistic creations (except software).

In all circumstances, the player purchases a license to use the game, and depending on the medium, they may also own the cartridge, disc, CD, DVD, etc. This license may include the game, items, and all its components (goods or services). Depending on the publisher’s strategy and the intended media, the right of access may be perpetual (a downloadable game accessible in its entirety offline) or temporary (The Crew on Ubisoft, whose servers were shut down at Ubisoft’s discretion).

The End User License Agreement (EULA) for games defines the licensing terms and, by extension, the publisher’s ability to terminate access to certain game elements, such as updates, bug fixes, or certain servers.

Video Game Law: Differences and Consequences Between Physical and Digital Formats

PFor games sold “in a box,” it’s important to understand what’s actually included:

• If it’s an online activation code for a one-time game download, then the concept of a physical sale seems inappropriate;

• If it’s an item containing all or part of the game without requiring an online connection, then the term “physical sale” still seems relevant.

This has immediate legal consequences: if the buyer becomes the owner of the physical medium, they can sell it without restriction. The terms and conditions of sale usually prohibit copying and reproducing the content, but the purchased medium belongs to the consumer, who can use it as they see fit.

It’s not certain that there are significant differences between the two formats, as each has its advantages and disadvantages.

If you have a physical copy of a game, it assumes, at a minimum, that the game is playable without an online system (for example, campaign modes or bot-based games). However, if the game is massively multiplayer via dedicated servers from the publisher, it could potentially block access.

Some publishers/games allow the creation of a private server without the publisher’s permission; however, most online game publishers will consider the creation of a private server to be copyright infringement.

Duration of access to “purchased” video games: planned or monetized disappearance

It is rare to have the right to resell a game license: whether temporary or perpetual, the license to use the game is always issued by the publisher and remains under their sole control.

The lack of a clear and explicit statement that the player/buyer is obtaining a license to use the game and not ownership of it is the subject of debate regarding whether this constitutes misleading advertising under the Consumer Code. However, it seems that publishers are relatively careful to emphasize, whenever possible, that it is only a license. But these references are generally limited to legal documents and are overshadowed by the presentations and sales offers of video games presented to the general public.

What are the consequences and setbacks for the video game sector?

The digitization of video games has been, and still is, seen as a considerable advantage, significantly reducing printing, shipping, and game deployment costs, offering guaranteed online access (no more losses or unplayable games due to physical media degradation), and providing online game content updates.

It is true that a significant number of games are now available at highly competitive prices because they are only available digitally.

It is also true that consumers are not necessarily disadvantaged simply by virtue of digitization. Only abuses can and must be combated.

Esports: A huge thank you to the Odyssée team for inviting the PCS Avocat law firm to the Red Bull Tetris Challenge at ESpot.

Video Game Competition: The Red Bull Tetris Challenge 2025

Hosted by influencer Camille “Yume” Laisné, the event brought together the top 10 players from the Odyssée League, who faced off against Team Red Bull live on Twitch, with commentary by Ken Bogard and NormanGenius.

Based on a reimagined version of the cult classic #Tetris, Red Bull Tetris® is an esports competition whose national rounds conclude in November, and the world final will take place from December 11th to 13th, 2025 in Dubai in a captivating setting: “a live Tetris® broadcast by over 2,000 drones in the sky, with the iconic Dubai Frame as a backdrop.”

Esports & Gaming Center – Projey Odyssée

The event organizer, Odyssée – Ikigai, is developing a leisure complex in Bussy-Saint-Georges dedicated to the gaming sector, including the creation of the world’s largest video game museum, a gaming arena, a unique food court, and pop culture spaces.

Congratulations to the event winner, Mickael, and congratulations to Etienne, who is still in the running for the next stage of the competition!

The “challenges” offered on social media are symptomatic of the impact and strain they exert on platform users, especially younger ones. Some are entertaining (Planking, Ice Bucket Challenge), others more disturbing (Momo Challenge / Blackout Challenge). This summer, the “burn lines” challenge, which involves deliberately burning one’s skin in the sun to create tan lines, alarmed health professionals.

These practices reveal the difficulty of understanding and controlling social media use among young people, the consequences of which can be very serious. Which parents would have let their children or teenagers watch the humiliating videos of Jean Pormanove, the Kick influencer who recently died during a stream?

Digital Adolescents & Privacy: CNIL Report on Social Networks

The recent report “Digital Adolescents and Privacy, a Survey of Middle School Students and Their Parents” (CNIL 2025) prepared by Mehdi Arfaoui and Jennifer Elbaz is very instructive regarding the challenges linked to the conditions of their use of social networks and the protection of their privacy.

Find the link.

This report calls for increased support for minors, families, and professionals so that cybersecurity culture becomes a collective reflex. It reiterates the importance of identifying and understanding the constraints imposed by digital technology and the associated hyper-connectivity:

• feedback (likes, comments, sharing, private messages, and all associated notifications and push notifications);

• the social value placed on sharing one’s intimacy, blurring private and public life, has a greater impact on children and adolescents.

Social Networks & Protection of Minors: Law & Legal Risks

Learning to use social media is a gradual process, involving phases of exploration and trial and error, the control of which, particularly by parents, is essential. Ensuring a balance between autonomy and privacy in a secure environment is a major challenge.

These essential practices raise significant legal issues :

• The protection of children’s personal data, but also indirectly that of their parents and families (login IDs, passwords, photos and videos, banking information).

• Cybersecurity and the risk of cyberbullying, hacking, abusive surveillance, data theft, online blackmail, identity theft, etc.

On the night of August 17, 2025, influencer Raphaël Graven, also known as “Jean Pormanove” on the Kickstarter platform, died during a live stream. The unusual circumstances of his death sparked considerable outrage, highlighting the difficult question of who was responsible.

While the exact conditions and causes of his death will only be known at a later date, it is already possible to investigate who is or are responsible for this tragedy. In this context, lawyer Chomiac de Sas answered questions from Quentin Le Van in an article published in full on August 19 on the LaCroix website.

Content publishers: the responsibility of co-influencers

The “Jean Pormanove” channel, hosted on the Kick platform, had over half a million subscribers and featured content showcasing several influencers: “Naturo,” “Safine,” and “Coudoux.” Revenue generated by the channel was paid to the Nice-based company “LeLokal,” wholly owned by the influencer Owen “Naruto” Cenazandotti.

The Kick channel’s distinguishing feature was its content depicting insults, mistreatment, and humiliation, generally centered around the influencers “Jean Pormanove” and “Coudoux,” both portrayed as physically and emotionally fragile.

A criminal investigation launched by the Nice public prosecutor’s office has so far brought three charges: “public incitement, via electronic means of communication, to hatred or violence against a person or group of people because of their disability,” “aggravated assault against vulnerable individuals resulting in a total work incapacity of less than eight days,” and “dissemination of recordings of images relating to the commission of offenses involving intentional harm to a person’s physical integrity.”

The influencers involved are awaiting the progress of the investigation, contesting both their knowledge of Raphael Graven’s health condition and any lack of consent to the abuse he suffered.

Kick: The negligent content host

The chain of responsibility also points to the platform that originally broadcast the content: Kick.

Founded in 2022, Kick is an audiovisual streaming platform owned by an Australian company. Competing with Twitch (Amazon), the platform has distinguished itself with a compensation system very favorable to content creators and a particularly permissive moderation policy. Furthermore, the Kick platform is directly linked to a major online betting and gambling platform, Stake, also created by the same founders.

Following the death of Jean Pormanove, authorities are questioning Kick’s status as a hosting provider, which allows it to be exempt from responsibility for the content it uploads. Indeed, the promotion of their channel, despite numerous reports to ARCOM and the Pharos platform, and the lack of a legal representative in Europe for the platform may constitute serious breaches of content moderation and the protection of individuals.

On August 26, 2025, the Paris prosecutor’s office opened an investigation against Kick for “organized supply of an illegal online platform” and for knowingly allowing the dissemination of videos of intentional attacks on the integrity of a person.

Arcom & the Minister for Digital Affairs: what about the public authorities?

Critics of those responsible for the case have also turned to public authorities, particularly Arcom – the French audiovisual and digital communications regulatory authority.

Arcom has been criticized for its failure to take action against the Kick platform, despite numerous warnings and reports from advocacy groups. Arcom does indeed have a range of tools at its disposal for regulating online content, including injunctions, fines, and legal action to suspend accounts or websites, delist content, and so on.

However, the legal and territorial scope of its jurisdiction, given the platform’s international status, limits its prerogatives and powers of action, as evidenced by the absence of a legal representative for Kick within the European Union – a legal requirement.

The Minister Delegate for Digital Affairs, Clara Chappaz, also spoke out against the Kick platform, citing breaches of the obligations of hosting providers as set out in the Law for Confidence in the Digital Economy.

Subscribers and viewers: ultimately and primarily responsible?

The responsibility of regular or occasional viewers and consumers of the channel’s content—several thousand per broadcast—is also a major issue.

The courts may investigate the role of subscribers who, through their subscriptions and donations, finance the broadcasting of content whose creation may constitute one or more criminal offenses. The concept of complicity under Article 121-7 of the Penal Code is strictly interpreted, limiting criminal liability, but nevertheless raises the question of civil, or at least moral, responsibility.

Similarly, ordinary viewers who knowingly benefit from the proceeds of a crime or offense fall under the criminal offense of receiving stolen goods, punishable under Article 321-1 of the Penal Code. While their prosecution is rare in practice, the courts have recognized that simply viewing illegal content can theoretically constitute receiving stolen goods, particularly if the internet user knows that the content is being broadcast without authorization or is inherently illegal.

One point, constantly raised since the beginning of this case, remains: were the violence and abuse depicted on screen real or (partially) simulated?

These societal questions have been addressed in other sectors where the conditions for creating widely distributed audiovisual content could be achieved illegally, particularly in the pornography industry. Our article.

To coincide with the release of the Nintendo Switch 2, the press section of the www.jeuxvideo.com platform published an article on the ownership of contemporary video games. Matthias Kulanhk, aka “Matt_Clank,” journalist and Head of the Home, Image, and Sound department for JVTE, discussed the specifics of Game Key cards with Pierre-Xavier Chomiac de Sas, a lawyer specializing in digital law.

Video game law has become more complex over the last decade due to the increasing density and size of game content.

In response to technological, economic, and cultural challenges, digital distribution has become the norm, significantly reducing the costs and time involved in setting and delivering games, while also providing greater flexibility for both consumers and creators.

Read the full publication

Nintendo Switch 2: Game Key Cards, a hybrid video game media format

The announcement of this new console’s features caught the attention of legal experts interested in the format of its cartridges: Game Key cards.

A new format for video game media, Game Key cards differ from traditional cartridges by not containing a copy of the game itself, but rather an activation key that allows the complete game to be downloaded to the console via the internet. The main reason for this is the large size of games compared to the capacity of physical cartridges, which represents a significant cost for publishers.

However, unlike the prepaid activation cards that have existed in the industry for several years, the Game Key card’s activation key can be perpetually reactivated, thus allowing for their exchange or sale.

Important note: once the game is installed, the game key card must remain inserted in the console to play.

This Nintendo innovation represents an original response to a significant conflict between video game publishers and players in a context of near-total digitalization of video game media.

The game key card embodies a hybrid video game medium, combining physical media with digital distribution. This flexibility offered by digital technology maintains the existence of a physical object, owned by the buyer and therefore free to transfer or resell.

Video game law: ownership of game key cards

Game Key Cards are part of a contemporary battle between publishers and players over the ownership of modern video games. Indeed, the concept of ownership in video games has profoundly changed: players no longer have ownership rights to physical game media, but only receive a digital license.

This transformation has major legal consequences: the theory of exhaustion of rights, which previously allowed the resale of software after purchase, no longer applies to digital games. Thus, users cannot resell or transfer their games as they would with physical goods.

Find our specialized publication on this topic:

2024.11 – Revue Lamy Droit de l’Immatériel – Jeux vidéo & biens virtuelle : une lutte de propriété entre éditeurs et joueurs

Video game law: Ownership versus license to use

Furthermore, players lose all rights to their virtual items if the publisher terminates the contract, generally without compensation. Although recognition of ownership rights over these digital objects is being considered—particularly because they have genuine economic or recreational value—publishers’ total control prevents such a legal development.

In 2024, players of the game “The Crew,” published by Ubisoft, were horrified to discover that the game’s servers had shut down, making any further use of the game impossible.

This case perfectly illustrates the limitations of the rights granted to players since the end of physical media sales for video games: players are dependent on the terms of their game licenses.

More information: https://pcs-avocat.com/actualites/presse-avocat-jeux-video-thecrew-ubisoft/

As part of the continuing legal education offered by the Entrepreneurial Bar Association, Ms. Chomiac de Sas, alongside Ms. Débora Cohen, presented a new training course focused on guiding lawyers’ communication practices on social media.

Liberated since the law of March 17, 2014, and further supported by recent rulings from the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU), lawyers’ communication has expanded considerably to encompass all existing tools, including social media.

These platforms have transformed how all individuals, both private citizens and professionals, interact, communicate, and share information. Lawyers are no exception, encouraging representative bodies to support their colleagues through this digital transformation.

This training aims to equip lawyers for effective, responsible, and ethical digital communication, while anticipating the specific risks associated with social media exposure.

Find Ms. Chomiac de Sas’s previous training courses on similar topics:

2025.03.13 – EDA – Intelligence artificielle (IA) & déontologie des avocats

2024.03.25 – EFB – Usages & pratiques Communication et déontologie de l’avocat

2025.02.17 – Barreau entrepreneurial – Profiter de l’IA Marketing pour développer son cabinet

2024.03.21 -Legaltechs d’avocats : règles déontologiques – Barreau de Paris

1. The digitization of the world, of justice and of legal services

The internet, social media, smartphones, blockchain, metaverses, and generative AI are all successive elements plunging our society into ever-increasing digitization. These transformations naturally affect the justice sector, which faces a threefold imperative: automation, dematerialization, and interoperability.

Applied to legal professionals, lawyers’ practices are now equipped with digital tools to assist legal consultations, practice management, interactions with the courts, and communication efforts.

However, these tools necessitate a constant adaptation of practices and increased vigilance regarding data security and the confidentiality of exchanges. Lawyers must integrate these tools while ensuring they uphold the essential principles of the profession, such as professional secrecy and the rules governing ancillary activities, including commercial ones.

2. The evolution of lawyers’ communication and current forms

Social media and digital platforms offer lawyers new avenues for visibility and interaction with the public. Communication is no longer limited to traditional media (brochures, websites) but now includes a variety of formats: posts, videos, podcasts, webinars, and more.

With limited training in these communication and marketing concepts, lawyers face the need for technical expertise and strategic thinking regarding the nature and reach of the messages they disseminate. Some lawyers, however, remain hesitant to engage publicly, fearing ethical breaches or damage to their reputation.

3. The applicable legal and ethical rules

Lawyers’ online communication is strictly regulated by the National Internal Regulations (RIN) and the rules of the Bar Association. Any communication aimed at promoting a lawyer’s services is considered advertising and must be declared to the Bar Council. Lawyers must respect professional secrecy, avoid any disparaging or comparative statements, and refrain from revealing the identity of their clients. Participation in blogs or social networks requires adherence to essential principles: dignity, loyalty, tact, integrity, and independence. Publications must be factual, provide truthful and honest information, and not mislead the public.

4. Social media communication strategy: how and why to communicate, and the necessary precautions

Developing a social media presence allows lawyers to showcase their expertise, inform the public, and enhance their reputation. However, every interaction must be part of a well-considered strategy, aligned with the profession’s values ​​and client expectations. It is essential to define objectives (visibility, education, prospecting), choose appropriate channels, and establish clear boundaries for communication.

Caution is advised to avoid any promotional misuse, the risk of false advertising, or breaches of professional confidentiality. Finally, moderating comments and managing interactions are crucial for preserving the lawyer’s reputation and credibility.

5. The difficult case of influencer lawyers and the associated legal risks

The influential lawyer, by virtue of their visibility and audience, finds themselves at the crossroads of ethical requirements and the constraints applicable to influencers. The law of June 9, 2023, reinforced by the ordinance of November 6, 2024, mandates transparency regarding commercial partnerships and strictly regulates disguised advertising. Penalties for violations are severe: fines of up to €300,000 and two years’ imprisonment, or even a ban on practicing as an influencer.

While a lawyer’s reputation or credibility may grant them influencer status, it appears problematic to allow an influencer to practice law. Indeed, in addition to the incompatibility of practicing a commercial profession involving the promotion of third-party products and services, the rules regarding influence and the editorial rules imposed by social networks too quickly encourage the publication of distorted, divisive content unrelated to the profession and which can lead to disciplinary, even civil and criminal proceedings.

6. Lawyers’ Guides and Handbooks

Our law firm PCS Avocat participated in the creation of guides and handbooks within the professional bodies responsible for training and supporting lawyers on related issues.

Created in 2021, the Advertising & Social Media Commission focused on the challenges linked to these new uses and supported lawyers in their use of social media. The Paris Bar Association decided to publish a document summarizing judicial and professional positions regarding lawyer communication on social media and new digital tools.

This document follows on from the previous handbook on lawyer communication published by the Paris Bar Association in 2020 to inform and raise awareness among lawyers on these topics.

The social media guide aims to provide lawyers with advice and recommendations for developing their use of social media, balancing the need for lawyers to master communication tools with the risks associated with inappropriate use in light of the rules governing our profession.

On May 21st, Mr. Chomiac de Sas had the pleasure of speaking at the UFR STAPS (Faculty of Sports Sciences) as part of a training session dedicated to esports law and video game competitions. Alongside Julien Lombard and Nicolas Besombes, the session focused on presenting the legal framework applicable to video game competitions and addressing contemporary issues in the sector: player health, the relationship between traditional sports and esports, inclusivity within the industry, etc.

Inter-university diploma in Esports

The Inter-University Diploma (DIU) in esports offered by the UFR STAPS (Faculty of Sports Sciences) is part of a professionalization initiative for those involved in the esports sector. This program aims to train specialists capable of managing, organizing, and developing projects in the field of esports, drawing on skills from sports science and sports management. The training, generally accessible to both students and professionals seeking career changes, combines theoretical instruction (management, event organization, legal and economic aspects of esports) with practical experience, often in collaboration with industry partners. It addresses the growing demand for structure and professionalization within the esports sector, offering career opportunities in coaching, managing organizations, and organizing competitions.

A professional training program in the esports sector

The inter-university diploma is designed for future professionals from a variety of fields: sports and esports medicine, nutrition specialists, experts in influencer marketing and other related sectors.

The overall program includes over 140 hours of training dedicated to the esports sector, focusing on management issues within esports teams, athlete health, and the challenges related to their performance.

The esports law course is part of a training program dedicated to the cultural aspects of esports, which includes presentations on the history of esports, its ecosystem, the sociology of esports athletes, governance and public policy, and the economics of esports.

A significant added value is that the courses are taught by industry professionals, the vast majority of whom work or are involved with professional esports organizations such as Karmine Corp, Vitality, G2, and Nove Perform.

Esports law: how the law regulates video game competitions

The training session led by Ms. Chomiac de Sas and Mr. Lombard focused on presenting the development of the legal framework applicable to esports as a form of video game competition, and the classification of the various applicable rights.

It addressed the challenges related to establishing its own independent legal regime and the legal obligations implemented for organizing esports events and the social protection afforded to players, as well as the creation of a professional esports player employment contract.

To provide a practical approach, the training then focused on presenting the specific legal issues and challenges applicable to the various professions within the core esports ecosystem: video game publishers, players and clubs, event organizers, competition broadcasters, and support and peripheral professions.

Esports issues & legal perspectives

The training program for professionals in the sector focused on presenting a variety of themes and reflections on current esports practices and the legal issues they may raise:

• The place of women in esports and the structuring of all-female leagues within a historically mixed ecosystem that still suffers from numerous inequalities;

• The cybersecurity needs of video game competitions in the face of cyberattacks aimed at penalizing events or the outcome of matches;

• The growing involvement of the International Olympic Committee in offering sports simulation competitions alongside or in conjunction with the Olympic Games;

Sport and esports: protecting the health of players

The structure of esports reveals numerous issues related to the safety and health conditions of players. Often overlooked and poorly understood, the risks associated with all activities related to esports in the context of child labor are nonetheless very significant.

Identifying those responsible for measures ensuring their protection is equally complex, involving a mix of employer clubs, event organizers, legal representatives, and game publishers.

Read our article.

Esports and Esportainment: Performance vs. Entertainment

In contrast to traditional video game consumption, esports, as an electronic sport, has focused on the pursuit of performance. Like traditional sports, high-level esports competitions involve professional players striving for excellence and self-improvement within the established sporting values.

Alongside this competitive dimension, esportainment is emerging as a trend where entertainment and spectacle take precedence. Here, the focus is no longer solely on athletic performance, but also on the ability to offer a captivating show, attracting a broad audience, sometimes less familiar with the sport, often with scripted events or enhanced with additional animations.

The strength of esportainment lies particularly in the wider audience it can reach by emphasizing the spectator experience, interactivity, and a user-friendly atmosphere, at the crossroads of sport and digital entertainment.

Differences in Organization and Structure. Performance-focused events are organized according to a rigorous and hierarchical logic: qualifications, regional leagues, international tournaments, with strict rules, high sporting stakes, and an organization similar to that of traditional sports federations. Emphasis is placed on fairness, transparency, team management, and compliance with regulations.

Esportainment, on the other hand, adopts a more flexible, entertainment-oriented structure. Events can incorporate original formats, celebrity guests, stage or musical performances, and prioritize storytelling and accessibility. The goal is to offer an immersive and entertaining experience, sometimes at the expense of pure competition. The structure is therefore less hierarchical, more event-driven, and requires skills in communication, audience management, and content creation.

Economic Impact and Audiences. By focusing on entertainment and spectacle, esportainment attracts a larger and more diverse audience than the traditional esports audience. This massive audience fosters the emergence of new economic models based on influence, content, and interactivity, and attracts advertisers from the broader entertainment sector. The monetization potential is therefore high, and the complementarity between performance and entertainment allows esports to establish itself as a major player in the digital entertainment economy.

Will/would esports be a sport?

Esports, as a form of video game competition, has developed by mimicking the organization of the traditional sports sector. However, legislators have refused to apply sports law to it, citing two key differences: firstly, the video game itself, which serves as the platform for competition, is closer to an audiovisual cultural product than a sporting one; and secondly, its exploitation rights are strictly regulated by intellectual property rights belonging to the creators.

Moreover, as an interactive cultural tool, video games have converged with sports in various and even intriguing ways: sports-themed video games, more or less realistic simulators, video games that allow players to perform sporting actions, and so on.

Despite the legal obstacles that could restrict or prohibit it, the esports sector continues its steady growth, comparable to that of certain traditional sports.