Mentioned in this article Games: League of Legends

European esports lawyers Pete Lewin and Jas Purewal from Purewal & Partners break down Riot’s new standardised penalties in competitive League of Legends.

Last November Riot became the first esports league operator to implement minimum contractual requirements for their top teams and players. This week, Riot made another huge play with the announcement that it is standardising the penalties for more than 30 different team and player offences in amateur and professional play.

What has Riot done in the past?

Previously, Riot has handled offence investigations and penalties on a very case-by-case basis, which in its own words has led to “inconsistency”, “unpredictability” and “delay”. Take for example ‘elo boosting’ (where one player plays on another’s account in order to increase their ranked league rating): there have been 10 cases investigated by Riot (according to esportspedia) with punishments ranging from a 14 day account ban to an indefinite suspension from all Riot organised tournaments, fines and in one case apparently even community service. In cases of toxic behaviour, suspensions have ranged from 14 days to upwards of an entire Split.

What is Riot changing?

[perfectpullquote align=”right” cite=”” link=”” color=”” class=”” size=””]An attempt to promote standardization and to improve the integrity of the league.[/perfectpullquote]

In an attempt to promote standardization and to improve the integrity of the league as a whole, Riot effectively has created two new menus of offences: (i) The LCS Penalty Index, which covers less severe offences and only applies to the EU and NA LCS; and (ii) the Global Penalty Index, which covers major offences and applies to all professional and semi-professional Riot-sanctioned leagues worldwide. The Indices set out details of more than 30 offences, the typical minimum and maximum penalties (so still allowing flexibility) and for how long after the offence itself occurs someone can be punished (the ‘limitation’ period).

Riot is also introducing a public-facing Penalty Tracker which will document every single penalty (from either Index) issued during the LCS season. It’s unclear if this will only document penalties imposed on the LCS regions (thereby excluding the LCK, LPL, LML, IWC, Challenger etc), or whether the reference to LCS is merely to indicate a rough timeframe – we’ll have to wait and see on that one.

What are some of the biggies?

LCS Penalty Index

The Indices themselves are a quick and well-presented read and provide some excellent examples of best practice when it comes to things like player acquisition, so we’d definitely recommend giving these a read yourselves if you haven’t already. There are a few that deserve particular expansion:

Failure to have starting players under contracts – Min Penalty: $5,000 – Max Penalty: $20,000 – LCS Index.

As we’ve written about previously, Riot has outlined that LCS player contracts must meet certain minimum requirements and before the start of each season teams have to self-certify that they’ve complied with these by submitting ‘summary sheets’ to Riot. For example, the Copenhagen Wolves were fined twice in the past for failing to have starting player contracts and fines have been between $1k and $3k (links here and here), so with Riot’s minimum penalty coming in at $2k higher than any previous fine, it seems that Riot is taking a stronger stance on the issue than before.

Actual and attempted match fixing – Min Penalty: 10 month suspension – Max Penalty: indefinite suspension – Global Index.

Match fixing is one of the most important concerns for any sport or competition since it undermines the integrity of the entire system, so it’s no surprise that league organizers take it seriously. Although there have been some attempts at match fixing actions in the past (for example there was one investigation by KeSPA in 2014 regarding allegations of match fixing in League of Legends), we’re unaware of any official ruling from Riot regarding the issue to date. With a minimum 10 month suspension penalty, Riot’s policy seems in keeping with the strict approach taken by Valve (which recently handed life-time bans to several players of team iBuyPower for their involvement in match fixing).

Intensive Tampering or Poaching (by player) – Min Penalty: 5 month suspension – Max Penalty: 10 month suspension – Global Index.

This is an interesting one which actually covers two distinct scenarios. The first is tampering, which occurs when player A encourages player B to breach the terms of their contract with team B (which is already policed under most legal systems; for example in common law countries like the UK, US and Canada it constitutes ‘tortious interference’). The second scenario is poaching, which is similar to tampering, but the intention is that player B goes and plays for player A’s team.

Both tampering and poaching are prohibited, even if the attempts are ultimately unsuccessful. The offence also only occurs where attempts are “intensive”, which means when a “credible, directed, and earnest attempt to make an offer of employment” is made. This is a helpful clarification that is clearly designed to set out a minimum threshold, but it also creates some obvious grounds that anyone charged with this offence can attempt to argue (i.e. that their conduct was not an “earnest attempt”). It is understandable that Riot has tried to carve out a certain high level amount of soliciting players, but there is certainly scope for ambiguity here.

Lastly, if there was any doubt remaining, Riot sets out exactly how teams should go about handling the acquisition of players contracted with other teams: “To inquire about the status of an official coach or player from another team, managers must contact the management of the team that the player and/or coach is currently contracted with.” In other words, don’t ask the players – go to their managers only.

Intensive Tampering or Poaching (by team) – Min Penalty: 10 month suspension – Max Penalty: indefinite suspension – Global Index.

This is a very similar offence to the one above, but applies to “Members” or “affiliates of a team (excluding players)” instead of players and carries much more substantial penalties – the general idea presumably being that teams and clubs should know better. Who exactly counts as a “Member” or an “affiliate” is not specified, but it probably means anyone directly involved in the organisation or operation of a club or people involved with those organizers/operators.

Gambling on semi-pro or pro games – Min Penalty: 10 month suspension – Max Penalty: 20 month suspension – Global Index.

While this offence itself carries fairly substantial penalties, Riot has opted for some fairly open wording when it comes to describing when the offence is actually committed – “Placing a sufficiently substantive material bet on any aspect of the outcome of a…game (e.g. betting money…)”. What does “material bet” mean – the example of money is given, but would this include skins, digital currency etc? What does “sufficiently substantive” mean – is there a minimum financial value a bet must cross before it is prohibited? Arguably, this wording leaves open a certain amount of space for players and clubs to place bets on events, although that is not expressly stated. In Riot’s 2016 LCS rules at section 10.3 though there is a pretty explicit ban on gambling of any kind on League of Legends tournaments by players, so it’s unclear why Riot has chosen to leave this offence and its boundaries so vague.

It’s worth noting that Riot still doesn’t go as far as Valve has in the past on the issue of player gambling, with Valve previously stating “Professional players, teams, and anyone involved in the production of CS:GO events, should under no circumstances gamble on CS:GO matches, associate with high volume CS:GO gamblers, or deliver information to others that might influence their CS:GO bets.”

Ongoing misconduct – Min Penalty: 3 month suspension – Max Penalty: 10 month suspension – Global Index.

This is the offence that any players accused of repeated toxicity or inappropriate conduct will face (although in the LCS Index there is also an offence for minor unacceptable behaviour with penalties of fines, rather than suspension). This again seems a step up from Riot’s previous penalties for toxic behaviour where suspensions typically ranged from 14 days to an entire Split.

On Broadcast Logo Violations – Min Penalty: warning – Max Penalty: unspecified fine – LCS Index.

[perfectpullquote align=”right” cite=”” link=”” color=”” class=”” size=””]Riot seems to be gearing up to enforce its sponsor prohibitions.[/perfectpullquote]

Riot provides an example here of where a player puts on a hat with an impermissible sponsor’s logo immediately following a game which is being broadcast. We only flag this to show how seriously Riot seems to be gearing up to enforce its sponsor prohibitions, with potentially substantial fines at its fingertips.

Are there any exceptions to these offences? Yes, and Riot details these themselves:

Extenuating or aggravating circumstances – basically, Riot’s list is not a complete list of all offences and even for those listed, they can change the min/max penalties as they see fit (e.g. the min might be reduced if the player admits their wrongdoing or the max might be increased for repeat offences);

Suspension periods only run during competitive months (i.e. Jan – Oct), so a 20 month suspension is really 2 years of competitive play; and

The ‘limitation’ periods for the majority of offences is between 6 and 36 months, so punishments can be handed out a long time after the actual offence.

Are there any obvious omissions?

Although it could arguably be brought under one of the other offences like cheating or misconduct, there is no express prohibition on doping. Clearly, this doesn’t mean that Riot condones doping, but it seems like a missed opportunity, especially since it has received a reasonably amount of media commentary recently (although there is very little empirical evidence of doping in eSports).

How will these penalties be enforced?

[perfectpullquote align=”right” cite=”” link=”” color=”” class=”” size=””]There is almost no detail about how Riot will actually apply these new rules.[/perfectpullquote]

There is almost no detail about how Riot will actually apply these new rules, how it will decide on what level of penalty to apply and what (if any) appeals process may apply. In other words, we now have a much clearer of what the rules are, but we still have no clear guidance regarding how these rules are going to be applied and enforced – this will change over time of course as the new penalties are put into action.

Other Changes?

Riot also announced the creation of an ‘LCS Pro Player Panel’ where LCS teams will periodically send one player to give feedback to Riot on a bunch of topics including player welfare and league format. This is still in its infant stages, so we will be keeping it under review to see how it works in practice.

What should players and clubs do now?

Honestly, go and read the Indices – they are an incredibly helpful list of rules to follow. Clubs could also benefit from more actively engaging in player education – coaches should sit down with players and discuss these offences, particularly the potential penalties, considering the huge impact these can have on everyone involved. Codes of conduct are also an excellent way for clubs to outline the behaviour expected of its players and these Indices provide an excellent starting point. Above all, clubs, coaches and players need to keep an active watch for these kinds of offences in the future since they could have a huge impact on all of them if Riot becomes involved. In the future, we can expect to see this becoming part of internal enforcement mechanisms by clubs; we would recommend even incorporating elements of these Indices within player agreements, accompanied by occasional spot checks and other safety measures.