Magnus Carlsen and Chess.com have reached a settlement agreement resolving Hans Niemann's claims against them, thus avoiding further litigation. On June 27, 2023, Judge Audrey Fleissig of the Eastern District of Missouri dismissed with prejudice the antitrust claims in Niemann's federal district court lawsuit against Carlsen, Chess.com, and Hikaru Nakamura--meaning that Niemann can never file that same claim against the same parties based on the same set of alleged facts--but Niemann retained the right to file his defamation claims at the state court level, and he had made clear his intention to do so.
After Niemann beat Carlsen over the board in the prestigious Sinquefield Cup tournament last year, Carlsen--despite zero credible evidence that Niemann cheated against him in that Sinquefield Cup game--not only withdrew from the Sinquefield Cup but he later resigned after one move versus Niemann in a major tournament with a $150,000 prize fund, thereby skewing the pairings for all of the tournament's participants; as I wrote at that time, "By throwing a game to Niemann without a fight and then competing hard
against all of the other players, Carlsen has placed every player other
than Niemann at a disadvantage. In short, there is no proof that Niemann
cheated against Carlsen, but there is proof that Carlsen threw a game.
As Grandmaster Jon Ludvig Hammer--a fellow Norwegian Grandmaster who has
served as Carlsen's second--declared, 'It's
completely unacceptable behaviour to lose on purpose. It's the most
unsportsmanlike [act] you can do in a competitive sport.'"
Each party issued a statement regarding the settlement:
Chess.com: "We are pleased to report that we have reached an agreement with Hans Niemann to put our differences behind us and move forward together without further litigation. At this time, Hans has been fully reinstated to Chess.com, and we look forward to his participation in our events. We would also like to reaffirm that we stand by the findings in our October 2022 public report regarding Hans, including that we found no determinative evidence that he has cheated in any in-person games. We all love chess and appreciate all of the passionate fans and community members who allow us to do what we do."
Magnus Carlsen: "I acknowledge and understand Chess.com's report, including its statement that there is no determinative evidence that Niemann cheated in his game against me at the Sinquefield Cup. I am willing to play Niemann in future events, should we be paired together."
Hans Niemann: "I am pleased that my lawsuit against Magnus Carlsen and Chess.com has been resolved in a mutually acceptable manner, and that I am returning to Chess.com. I look forward to competing against Magnus in chess rather than in court and am grateful to my attorneys at Oved & Oved for believing in me and helping me resolve the case."
It is not clear if Chess.com or Carlsen paid any money to Niemann as part of this settlement. The key elements of this settlement are (1) the public acknowledgment by both Chess.com and Carlsen that there is no evidence that Niemann cheated in any in-person games, (2) Carlsen stating that he will play against Niemann in future events, and (3) Chess.com fully reinstating Niemann. In short, this is a win for Niemann regarding his assertion that he has not cheated in over the board play, regarding his attempt to be reinstated at Chess.com, and regarding his participation in over the board events without concern that Carlsen would refuse to play against him or refuse to play in the same events with him.
It is worth emphasizing that Niemann's 2699 performance rating in the 2022 U.S. Championship--his debut appearance in that event, taking place under intense scrutiny in the wake of the anti-Niemann actions and statements by Carlsen, Chess.com, Nakamura, and others--matched his pre-tournament rating of 2699. A 2700 FIDE rating is considered the benchmark for elite status, so Niemann demonstrated--in an event with strict anti-cheating measures--that he can play at or near elite level in a major tournament against top Grandmasters. Niemann is relatively young and he is known for being a hard-working chess player, so it is reasonable to assume that he could push his rating well above 2700 (he achieved his peak rating of 2708 in May 2023).
There is a regrettable and growing trend to deny the meaning and value of objective truth/objective standards, and to base decisions on feelings as opposed to evidence, which has created what is often referred to as "cancel culture": a person or organization can be "canceled" because of how people feel about that person or organization regardless of whether there is any evidence that the accused person or organization violated any laws or committed any misconduct. That is what Chess.com and Carlsen attempted to do to Niemann: cancel him because of how they feel about him, regardless of what the evidence shows. It should be added that this type of flawed thinking regarding the meaning and value of objective truth/objective standards has also led to the popularization of the idea that people should be rewarded with scholarships and jobs based not on the objective merits of each applicant but on subjective determinations of equity and entitlement; discussion of that idea is beyond the scope of this article, but the implications of reorganizing society based on subjective feelings are significant: do you want your fate in the hands of the best qualified person to make a medical diagnosis, to decide a court case, or to fly a plane, or do you want your fate in the hands of a person who has subjectively been deemed worthy of receiving an unearned benefit in the name of equity/entitlement? America is founded on principles of equality, while Orwell's Animal Farm depicts what happens when a society is founded on the principle that everyone is equal but some people are more equal than others; when merit and objectivity are replaced with feelings and subjectivity, chaos ensues.
Here, the reality is that both Carlsen and Chess.com acted improperly because they defamed Niemann without evidence supporting their assertions, and because their actions harmed Niemann's status as a professional chess player. I am not a Niemann fan and I condemn his admitted online cheating, but unless or until past online cheating is considered disqualifying for over the board play one's online conduct and one's over the board conduct are separate issues. Further, Chess.com had already dealt with Niemann's prior online cheating, so the principle of res judicata (that which has been litigated before cannot be litigated again) should have applied in the sense that Niemann should not be punished twice for the same offense; he was punished for his proven online cheating, so it was wrong for Chess.com to ban Niemann after Carlsen's petulant behavior and unfounded accusations/insinuations.
