Imagine that, a gamer was dumb enough to argue about free speech rights.

A federal court dismisses a case where an (alleged) moron complained about his free speech rights being violated in a video game. A Pennsylvania man actually tried to claim that his civil rights were violated after he was muted by the developers in an online video game.

To interject briefly: Yes, there are indeed people that don't have a fucking clue what "freedom of speech" actually means. It just so happens that the most ignorant are also the most vocal, be it on social media or in the world of gaming. The First Amendment to the Constitution only really protects you from censorship by the government. Companies can do whatever they want if they don't like what you're saying. Freedom of speech is not a freedom from the consequences of your speech. With that super basic lesson out of the way, let's continue.

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the 3rd Circuit says that a lawsuit filed by "serial litigator" Amro Elansari of Exton, PA. In his latest lawsuit, Elansari had claimed that game developer Jagex had apparently "muted" him after 2,000 hours. The official court document doesn't seem to specify what being muted means in this case. From the sounds of it, it seems like Elansari was banned from playing online. It also does not specify which Jagex game Elansari was barred from, but I am assuming it was something RuneScape related. RuneScape is Jagex's biggest and most well-known franchise.

Elansari's suit was seeking "whatever the jury (saw) fit" plus a de-muting so that he could go back to playing online.

This lawsuit first landed on the desk of U.S. Eastern District Judge Mark Kearney's desk. Initially, Judge Kearney allowed Elansari to pursue the case but then shortly after dismissed the suit on the basis that Elansari hadn't actually made any real constitutional claims. It was after this dismissal that Elansari appealed to the circuit court.

The circuit court also ruled that Elansari had not been subjected to any sort of "unequal treatment compared to all other players who are not muted." In addition to the lack of any free speech rights being violated, the court ruled that there were no violations of federal anti-discrimination laws. In short, the court ruled that the Fourteenth Amendment was also not violated at any point. This makes sense because much like the First Amendment, a Fourteenth Amendment claim can only be made against the government, not against private companies.

This isn't Elansari's first rodeo though. Pennlive.com notes that in November 2018, Elansari had a lawsuit dismissed wherein he claimed he was scammed by the Tinder dating app. In 2016, the PA Superior Court denied an appeal by Elansari after he was arrested for lighting up a joint in front of several Bloomsburg University officers. In total, Elansari has filed 10 lawsuits in the U.S. Eastern District Court just in the past year and a half. Four of those were filed in July 2019 alone.