Microsoft loses Brazilian court case after telling hacked Xbox user to re-purchase games — tech giant ordered to restore Xbox account with all games and pay $400 in damages
Though it sets no precedent outside Brazil.
A Brazilian gamer who lost his Microsoft account and all his digital games has won a court order forcing the company to hand it all back, after support staff told him to simply repurchase his library. The user, who posts as Ordo_Liberal on Reddit, shared a screenshot of a small-claims ruling in the Xbox subreddit that gives Microsoft 15 days to restore access or face fines and roughly $400 (R$2,000) in damages. He said the account had two-factor authentication enabled when it was flagged and permanently suspended, and that none of Microsoft's recovery options allowed him to regain access before he filed his lawsuit.
According to the support emails he posted, Microsoft suspended the account after detecting what it described as unauthorized access, and said an investigation found the account's security information had been changed. The company treated the suspension as permanent and directed him to buy his games again rather than reinstating the ones already tied to the account.
Anyone with a large Microsoft account might want to take note here, because the suspension didn’t target a single game or console but the user’s entire account. Microsoft accounts can carry Xbox purchases, Windows licenses, store apps, 365, and OneDrive data, and a permanent suspension blocks all of it, even, as in this case, when you’ve got strong security and two-factor authentication set up.
Brazil's Consumer Defense Code and its small-claims track allow individuals to bring cases without a lawyer and without paying court costs, meaning Ordo_Liberal was able to take Microsoft to court without incurring any costs. If Microsoft misses the payment deadline, an additional 10% penalty will be imposed. While the damages awarded in this case are minor, it's notable that Microsoft has been compelled to restore the account and its contents, which runs counter to the standard platform position that customers license digital games rather than own them.
This, of course, is a first-instance small-claims judgment, not binding precedent, and it covers one account in one jurisdiction. Courts elsewhere have gone the other way. Chinese courts have recognized game accounts as inheritable property, while U.S. rulings generally treat games as revocable licenses. The case comes as both Microsoft and Sony push players away from physical media, with Xbox testing a way to convert discs into digital entitlements and Sony ending new PlayStation disc production in 2028. Microsoft hasn’t publicly commented on the ruling.
Follow Tom's Hardware on Google News, or add us as a preferred source, to get our latest news, analysis, & reviews in your feeds.
Get Tom's Hardware's best news and in-depth reviews, straight to your inbox.

Luke James is a freelance writer and journalist. Although his background is in legal, he has a personal interest in all things tech, especially hardware and microelectronics, and anything regulatory.
-
TerryLaze Is there a lawyer in the house?!?!Reply
What am I missing?
MS has to pay 1.500 within 15 days or will be fined another 10% on top of that?! So how is that forcing MS to do anything?
From what I understand this part "enforcement for non-voluntary compliance must be requested by the interested party" means that the account holder would have to force MS themselves to give the account back? yes? no?
"In view of the foregoing, I RULE THE REQUEST MERITORIOUS , pursuant to Art. 487, item I of the CPC , to:
a) Order the defendant, regarding the obligation to act, to proceed with the unblocking of the account under the plaintiff's email, under the email , within 15 (fifteen) days, under penalty of a daily fine of R$ 150.00 (one hundred and fifty reais), capped at R$ 1,500.00 (one thousand five hundred reais), already understood as conversion into losses and damages, pursuant to Art. 499 of the CPC; and b) Order the defendant to pay, as compensation for moral damages, the amount of R$ 2,000.00 (two thousand reais) to the plaintiff, adjusted for inflation from the current date (Precedent No. 362 of the STJ) pursuant to Art. 389, sole paragraph of the Civil Code, plus statutory default interest from the date of service of process, pursuant to Art. 406, § 1 of the Civil Code.
No court costs and attorney's fees, pursuant to Art. 55 of Law 9,099/95.
Let the name of the legal counsel designated by the defendant be noted for the purpose of future publications.
Should the debtor fail to pay any certain sum that was the subject of the judgment within 15 (fifteen) days from the final and unappealable judgment (trânsito em julgado) of the sentence or ruling, the judgment amount shall be increased by a 10% (ten percent) fine, as provided for in Article 523 of the CPC, regardless of a new formal notice, under the terms of Precedent 97 of FONAJE and Precedent 13.9.1 of TJRJ Notice 23/2008.
Once the final and unappealable nature (trânsito em julgado) is certified, and after the 15-day period established in Art. 523 of the CPC, in case of a ruling, enforcement for non-voluntary compliance must be requested by the interested party.
Thereafter, if no new motions are filed within 15 days, let the case be closed and archived. After 90 days from archiving, the case records will be disposed of, pursuant to Art. 1 of Joint Regulatory Act 01/2005.
The plaintiff, in a potential enforcement proceeding, must observe the following Precedents, contained in TJRJ Notice 23/2008 and Joint Notice TJ/COJES No. 15/2016: Precedent No. 13.9.5 - "Art. 523, §1 of the CPC/2015 does not apply to the amount of the coercive fine."; Precedent No. 14.2.5 - "Attorney fees do not apply,..." -
Kindaian Well, from what i understand of law, their only option is to either comply or appeal. Anything else will result in the case being reopened as "non-compliance" with the court, which is almost an automatic penalty.Reply -
TechieTwo I have 100% confidence that Microsoft will appeal and magically win on appeal as they magically seem to do in 99.999999999% of lawsuits. They must have "amazing" attorneys... :(Reply -
usertests Reply
$2000 reals is $400 USD. They can pay it, or ignore it forever.TechieTwo said:I have 100% confidence that Microsoft will appeal and magically win on appeal as they magically seem to do in 99.999999999% of lawsuits. They must have "amazing" attorneys... :( -
atomicWAR And this is one of the many reasons phydical games matter so much. MS can't tske away a disk... if they and Sony insist on pulling physical media... I am out.Reply -
TerryLaze Reply
Sure they can, they can push an system update at any time stopping any disc they want to stop working.atomicWAR said:And this is one of the many reasons phydical games matter so much. MS can't tske away a disk... if they and Sony insist on pulling physical media... I am out.
You would have to stay offline with your console which takes away a lot of the reason to even have a console.
The problem is the DRM and laws not being able to keep up with the digital age, not if a game is physical or digital. -
dalauder Reply
Not unique.Why_Me said:The Brazillian judicial system is straight up corrupt.
I heard of this country in North America where it's almost impossible to convict rich people, unless they're an unusual case where they're being "made example of". -
Lamarr the Strelok Reply
Well played.dalauder said:Not unique.
I heard of this country in North America where it's almost impossible to convict rich people, unless they're an unusual case where they're being "made example of". -
atomicWAR Reply
Or you can buy a new console and a new gamer tag but you're not wrong about drm being broken. It needs fixing. Regardless having physical games is still currently the best way to perserve your game libarary on console.TerryLaze said:Sure they can, they can push an system update at any time stopping any disc they want to stop working.
You would have to stay offline with your console which takes away a lot of the reason to even have a console.
The problem is the DRM and laws not being able to keep up with the digital age, not if a game is physical or digital.