An nameless reader shares a report: One yr in the past this month, Microsoft introduced it will spend $68.7 billion to amass Activision Blizzard, highlighting how it will get “iconic franchises” together with Name of Obligation, Warcraft and Sweet Crush for that price. However now that avid gamers and regulators are worrying Microsoft may hold Name of Obligation from showing on Sony’s PlayStation, Microsoft’s legal professionals are out of the blue pretending they do not know why Name of Obligation is particular. And even when it got here out, for that matter.
As Matt Stoller notes, the corporate’s 37-page reply to the FTC lawsuit searching for to dam the Activision Blizzard deal contains this laughable passage: “Microsoft avers that it lacks information or info ample to kind a perception as to the reality of the allegations regarding trade perceptions of Name of Obligation and Name of Obligation’s unique launch date; or as to the reality of the allegations regarding Name of Obligation’s launch and typical launch schedule and the sources and price range Activision allocates to Name of Obligation, together with the variety of studios that work on Name of Obligation.”
