Recommended Free Tools
Bungie’s lawsuit over the Ring-1 cheat business was still active at the latest located ruling: in July 2026, a federal judge denied defendant Vincent Magny’s motion to dismiss for lack of personal jurisdiction. That decision means the court rejected Magny’s argument that it lacked authority over him; it did not decide whether Bungie’s allegations are true or whether he or other defendants are liable.
What Bungie alleges about Ring-1
Bungie alleges that the Ring-1 group developed, marketed, and sold software designed to facilitate cheating in Destiny 2 and evade Bungie’s anti-cheat detection. Its pleadings describe a hypervisor-based technique and allege that the software was updated to avoid detection. These are allegations in Bungie’s complaint, not findings made by the court. [c001]
Bungie’s original 2023 complaint also alleged that the company spends seven figures annually on anti-cheat measures. That is Bungie’s claimed spending, not an independently audited budget figure. [c002]
What the July 2026 ruling did—and did not—decide
In its July 2026 order in Bungie Inc. v. Fisher et al., Doc. 188, the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Washington denied Magny’s motion to dismiss for lack of personal jurisdiction. In plain language, personal jurisdiction concerns whether a court has authority to hear claims involving a particular defendant. The order’s operative disposition was: “DENIES Defendant Magny’s Motion to Dismiss.” [c001]
What’s actually slowing this PC down?
Pick the symptom - the matching free tool is one click away.
#1 Best Overall
The ruling is procedural. It does not establish that Ring-1 cheated, resolve Bungie’s claims, or amount to a finding of liability against Magny or anyone else. The latest located ruling is Doc. 188; whether a later judgment, settlement, or ruling followed it is not established here.
Claims in Bungie’s second amended complaint
The court’s order summarizes eight causes of action in Bungie’s second amended complaint:
Rank #2
- Relive the '90s – Immerse yourself in the golden age of 16-bit video games, competing to become the ultimate Video Game Champion.
- Competitive Strategy – Manage your time and resources between earning money, renting games, studying, and mastering video game strategies.
- For 2-5 Players – Perfect for game nights with friends, where 2-5 players can compete in a 50-90 minute gaming session.
- 90s Nostalgia – Beg your parents for new games, buy magazines, and play your favorite titles – all wrapped in retro vibes!
- Great Replayability – With unique strategic decisions, each game brings fresh challenges and new paths to victory.
- Copyright infringement, including direct, vicarious, and contributory theories.
- Civil violations of the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act (RICO).
- Circumvention of technological measures under the Digital Millennium Copyright Act (DMCA).
- A claim under the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act (CFAA).
- Breach of contract.
- Intentional interference with contractual relations.
- Civil conspiracy.
The defendants include people identified by aliases. The order describes Magny as someone Bungie alleged had been a Ring-1 forum staff member and quality-assurance tester; that description, too, is an allegation rather than a judicial finding. [c001]
Independent reader supportYour contribution helps us test, update, and keep practical guides available for everyone.How this differs from Bungie’s other cheat cases
Bungie has brought separate actions involving other alleged cheat businesses. Their outcomes should not be treated as decisions in the Ring-1 case.
AimJunkies
In the separate AimJunkies litigation, a jury found the defendants liable for direct, vicarious, and contributory copyright infringement and awarded Bungie $63,210 based on actual profits, according to TorrentFreak’s 2024 report. The appeal was later dismissed, leaving the jury verdict in place, the outlet reported. A separate arbitration award of nearly $4.4 million in damages and fees also remained intact; it was not part of the jury’s $63,210 award. [c003]
TorrentFreak also reported receiving an unverified email from an unknown address purporting to represent AimJunkies and saying the defendants accepted responsibility. The outlet said it could not verify the email, so it should not be treated as an authenticated admission. [c003]
LaviCheats and Elite Boss Tech
In the LaviCheats case, a court entered default judgment against Kunal Bansal and issued a permanent injunction restricting cheat-software distribution and promotion, among other conduct. A 2023 order in the separate Elite Boss Tech case imposed related restrictions. These actions show other legal routes Bungie pursued, but they involved different defendants and records from the Ring-1 lawsuit. [c004] [c005]
Quick Recap
Product prices and availability are accurate as of the date/time indicated and are subject to change. Any price and availability information displayed on Amazon at the time of purchase will apply.
Free tools Windows power users keep installed
One-click scans. No signup required.
