Esports Visa Dilemma: Bestia vs BLAST.TV – Round 1

            Counter-Strike is one of the most influential and long-standing video games in the history of competitive gaming. Within the competitive circuits organized by tournament operators licensed by Valve, Majors occupy a privileged position, assembling the world’s top-tier teams to represent the highest standard of competition in the discipline.

Qualifying for a Major not only constitutes elite recognition for players and their organizations, but also entails significant economic benefits, global visibility, and opportunities for professional development.

I. Introduction

On this occasion, a unique situation arose due to the immigration and visa protocols existing in the United States wherein BESTIA was unable to secure the required visas by the tournament operator’s stated deadline, ultimately resulting in value loss not only for the team and the involved tournament organizer, but also for the broader community of players and consumers.

BLAST.TV is a prominent third-party esports tournament organizer, who is operating the Major to be held in Austin, Texas, from 3 June to 22 June 2025, featuring 32 teams competing for a prize pool of USD 1,250,000.^[1] However, in the final weeks of May, BESTIA^[2], a professional Argentine esports organization, despite having qualified for the Major, was excluded from participation due to administrative matters.

II. Chronology of the Dispute

On 17 April 2025, BESTIA defeated the Brazilian esports organization Team Legacy 2-0 in a best-of-three (Bo3) match, securing third place in the South America Regional Qualifier^[3]. By achieving this placement, BESTIA had formally qualified for the BLAST.TV Austin Major 2025.

Exactly one month after securing its qualification, BESTIA published a public plea on social media, calling upon the community for assistance in obtaining the remaining visas, or work authorizations necessary to participate in the Major^[4]. In a 17 May post on X, the team’s founder highlighted the team’s three-year-long struggle to acquire the relevant immigration documents for the non-U.S. citizen professional esports athletes to compete in the U.S. The campaign, amplified under the hashtag “#ArgentinaAlMundial,” was supported by many professional teams and players, and succeeded in garnering support not only from Argentine government officials, but also from the country’s Ambassador himself.^[5]

On 21 May, BLAST.TV issued an official statement announcing its decision to remove BESTIA from the Major for failing to secure the required visas, replacing them with Team Legacy^[6].

However, the following day, BESTIA succeeded in obtaining all necessary visas for its players^[7]. Despite previously exercising discretionary exceptions to rigid application of its timelines, after 22 May, BLAST.TV still maintained its prior decision to remove the Argentinian team^[8]. Not only did this decision detriment BESTIA, considering their loss out on significant financial benefits and the opportunity to represent Argentina internationally^[9], but it was also to the detriment of its players who were denied their Major debut, and to the broader community, which had rallied in their support.

On 24 May, BLAST.TV aimed to clarify the ongoing conflict by releasing a detailed timeline via its social media platforms, asserting the rigidness of the visa documentation submission deadline, which expired for all participating teams on Wednesday, 21 May at 5:00 PM CEST^[10]. The response from BESTIA’s CEO was unequivocal: “You know you’re doing the wrong thing. We wanted to resolve this fairly. See you in court.”

Interesting, it was later reported by the esports organization’s own legal representatives that the organization had “began the visa process incorrectly and without proper legal support prior to their involvement,” illustrating the complexities of the U.S. visa process in esports ecosystem.^[11] Ultimately, it will be interesting to see if the team formally brings a suit for any purported damages suffered as result of these actions in “Texas and then in London” as Mr. Lococo stated in his social media post.^[12]

III. Legal Implications of the Dispute

1. Visa Issues

It is established that in order for a non-U.S. citizen to earn income or undertake any paid service or work for compensation within the country, the individual must obtain a “visa.”^[13] There are a variety of available visas for an individual within the United States; however, the two most applied for visas classifications in the esports and professional video game space are the O-1 visa (the “O1 Visa”) and the P-1A visa (the “P1 Visa”).^[14] In most cases, an esports player applies for a P1 Visa instead of an O1 Visa, considering that O1 Visas require an individual to possess an “extraordinary ability,” a significant standard that most competitive gamers fail to achieve.^[15]

By virtue of this fact, most esports competitors, event organizers, and esports teams applying for work authorization to enter the U.S. to compete in a tournament or as part of a league will apply for a P1 Visa. While a discussion of all required evidence for a P1 Visa is outside the scope of this article, the general requirements include a competitor’s gaming history and earnings, media and press on the player and the event, information on the event that they are participating in, an itinerary of the trip, as well as letters of recommendation from notable press, the tournament organizers, and potentially third-party peer groups like the Esports Trade Association (ESTA).^[16]

Another crucial consideration and one that certainly plays a factor is the timing of a filing, including whether a party utilizes the “premium processing” option when submitting an application.^[17] Specifically, a visa application filed with “premium processing” provides an answer to a visa application within fifteen (15) business days of filing from the United States Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS).^[18] In contrast, an application filed without “premium processing” is subject to a much longer and unspecified waiting period. Consequently, while the costs of “premium processing” are high, the expeditated nature and the definitive timetable provide an applicant with a concrete timeline for the application process.

This is especially crucial when considering the potential need for scheduling and attending a consular or embassy interview after a visa is successfully issued.^[19] Further, if a “Request for Evidence” (RFE) is issued, an applicant is then required to submit additional information to respond to the cited issues. In such instances, “premium processing” again provides a similar clearly defined response time calculated from when the applicant submits their response to the RFE, while applications submitted without “premium processing” do not receive this same definitive timetable.^[20]

Overall, it is clear that an esports team, a tournament operator, or a gaming talent should apply for the proper work authorization in a timely manner and provide themselves with ample lead time to account for the usage (or not) of “premium processing,” the potential for the issuance of an RFE (which stops the process pending an acceptable answer), and the subsequent administrative steps related to obtaining the visa from the appropriate consular or embassy.

If an esports business or individual does not provide the appropriate evidence to obtain a visa in a timely fashion, then similar to BESTIA, the team or player (or players) may be barred from competing in the United States as entering the U.S. and competing without proper authorization could subject the party to potential liability that may impact their future opportunities to return to the country.^[21]

2. Contractual Issues

In addition to potential visa issues, there are also some contractual matters to explore related to this situation. For example, to determine the governing rules applicable to the legal relationship between BESTIA and BLAST.TV, reference must be made to the BLAST.tv Major Rulebook^[22], the CS Major Supplemental Rulebook^[23], and particularly the Team Participation Agreement (“TPA”) which every participating esports organization agrees to in order to compete inthese types of events.

While the first two regulatory instruments are publicly accessible, the TPA is privately executed between BLAST.TV and the individual team and thus confidential.

Consequently, the BLAST.tv Major Rulebook stipulates, inter alia, the following provisions:

• Purpose:

“3.1. Purpose: The Rulebook (which for the purposes hereof includes all schedules and appendices) is for the benefit of all Tournament stakeholders, including the Teams, the Participants, BLAST and Tournament Partners. The purpose of the Rulebook is to protect and maintain the integrity and competitive balance of the Tournament, and to set out the minimum standards to be expected of all Teams and Participants.”

• Binding nature of the Rulebook and the TPA upon participation:

“3.2. Acceptance of the Rulebook: The Rulebook shall apply to, and be binding upon, the Teams and all Participants. By participating in the Tournament, all Teams and Participants expressly and unconditionally agree to comply with, and be bound by, the Rulebook and the terms of the Team’s TPA insofar as the same relates to the applicable Teams and Participants.”

• Eligibility representations by participants:

“7.7.3. By participating in the Tournament, all Participants warrant and represent that they are eligible to do so in accordance with the Rulebook and the TPA (and any other rules or regulations connected thereto).” [Emphasis added]

Although not expressly provided in the Major Rulebook, possession of valid immigration documentation is a sine qua non precondition for participation as an esports player cannot earn a salary nor compete in an organized event or tournament for compensation or prize money without the proper immigration clearance in the form of a visa.^[24]

• Mandatory arbitration for dispute resolution:

“15.4.2. For any matters which do not fall within the scope of Clause 14.4.1, the Teams and Participants shall have the right to appeal such decision within ten (10) working days of BLAST handing down its Sanction. Such appeal shall be made to a sole arbitrator appointed in accordance with the Arbitration Rules of Sport Resolutions (UK). […] The appeal shall be governed by the Arbitration Act 1996 and Sport Resolutions (UK)’s Appeal Arbitration Rules, which Rules are deemed to be incorporated by reference to this Clause. The decision of the sole arbitrator shall be final and binding on all concerned.”

• Governing law:

“15.5. Governing Law: This Rulebook and dispute or claim arising out of or in connection with it or its subject matter or formation (including non-contractual disputes or claims) shall be governed by and construed in accordance with the laws of England and Wales.”

In turn, the CS Major Supplemental Rulebook establishes additional obligations:

• Under “Tournament Operating Requirements,” the obligation of Tier 1 tournament operators to notify participants of the host country’s immigration requirements:

“4.3 Additional Information. Tournament Operator shall publish the following additional information no later than 10 months before the Tournament main event for Tier 1[…] The visa region where the Tournament takes place, e.g., USA, Schengen, China, etc.”

3. Dispute Resolution

Considering these provisions, to obtain either the reversal of BLAST.TV’s decision or alternatively a compensatory remedy, BESTIA must file an appeal before the designated UK arbitrator within ten (10) working days of receiving formal notice of their replacement. In fact, there exists several alternative dispute resolution (ADR) entities that attempt to resolve issues unique to athletics including by providing “a highly specialized forum where those disputes could be heard and decided, quickly and inexpensively.”[25] For instance, there is the Court of Arbitration for Sport (“CAS”)/ Tribunal Arbitral Du Sport (“TAS”), which attempts to “facilitate the settlement of sports-related disputes through arbitration or mediation by means of procedural rules adapted to the­ specific needs of the sports world.”[26]

The CAS/TAS is tasked with “resolving legal disputes in the field of sport through arbitration.”[27] Specifically, the CAS/TAS is recognized by “the Paris Convention signed by the presidents of the International Olympic Committee (IOC), the Association of Summer Olympic International Federations (ASOIF), the Association of the International Olympic Winter Sports Federations (AIOWF), and the Association of National Olympic Committees (ANOC).”[28] Other similar ADR organizations exist to resolve matters specific to sports including the Sports Conflict Institute (SCI) and Sport Resolutions.[29]

These independent dispute resolution services operate globally and attempt to “provide an expert, speedy and cost effective alternative to internal appeals processes and court-based litigation.”[30] However, none of these sport resolution entities provide specific esports or professional video game related mediation services; and, instead, these organizations are typically used for “disputes of a commercial nature (e.g. a sponsorship contract), or of a disciplinary nature following a decision by a sports organization.”[31]

Although the factual determination of whether a binding visa submission deadline exists will be subject to the evidentiary submissions of both parties, it is undeniable that BESTIA is an organization with prior experience in international tournaments that possesses familiarity with relevant regulatory frameworks, and certainly the relevant knowledge of visa deadlines for tournament eligibility. But, even if such knowledge was lacking, the necessity of possessing a valid visa to enter the U.S. is a matter of public knowledge and one that esports organizations are aware of and encounter on a consistent basis.^[32]

Ultimately, it remains to be seen whether BLAST.TV failed to provide notice to the organizations of the applicable deadline for the submission of immigration documentation. However, it is fair to assume that BESTIA must have submitted a notice and formally request arbitration no later than Thursday, 5 June 2025.

While it is standard commercial practice in the United Kingdom to submit such disputes to arbitration, the present controversy appears as a paradigmatic case for the intervention of the newly established International Gaming and Esports Tribunal (IGET)^[33], particularly given that BLAST.TV has recognized the authority of the Esports Integrity Commission (ESIC) in its competitions since 2019. The usage of this ADR organization may be more appropriate than any of the other existing “sport” resolution organizations for this type of dispute, such as the CAS/TAS or Sports Resolutions.

The IGET was founded by the ESIC in partnership with the World Intellectual Property Organization Arbitration and Mediation Center (WIPO AMC) to provide a specialized tribunal to review and rule on legal disputes within the esports ecosystem due to its specialized and rapidly evolving nature.^[34]

While the parties must specifically agree to the organization’s jurisdiction within an applicable arbitration clause, in the future, this tribunal may be an available avenue to rule on such matters in a timely fashion. By incorporating specific language in their Model Clause that an applicable matter be “submitted to the International Games and Esports Tribunal (IGET) for mediation in accordance with the WIPO Mediation Rules” they may provide the tribunal with expedited jurisdiction over the dispute.^[35]

Specifically, the IGET was formed to provide “specialized expertise,” “global accessibility,” “comprehensive coverage” for a variety of disputes, and “efficient procedures” for “swift, effective resolutions” to “minimize disruption” to the “industry’s fast-moving ecosystem.”^[36] It will be interesting to see if this specialized tribunal becomes the default alternative dispute resolution (ADR) decision-maker for esports disputes which would require esports event organizers, esports teams, other companies and parties involved in the professional esports business to integrate such dispute resolution language into their agreements. If so, then, the use of IGET may become the industry norm for settling these types and for addressing any other uniquely esports disputes.

IV. Conclusion

Overall, while not novel to the esports space, the removal of BESTIA from the upcoming Major certainly highlights another glaring issue with the current constructs of the United States’ immigration and visa approval system, especially as it relates to the esports space. Consequently, it is prudent advice for any party wishing to obtain work authorization to apply well in advance of any required deadline and to explore utilizing the “premium processing” option if time is of the essence or in cases where a rapid response is beneficial and when such prompt information would alleviate potential concerns such as missing a tournament eligibility deadline.

^[1] https://esportsinsider.com/how-to-watch-austin-major-2025

^[2] BESTIA was founded in 2023 by Alejandro “Papo MC” Lococo, a prominent Argentine rapper and professional poker player. Since its inception, the organization has successfully established itself as one of Argentina’s leading teams within the Counter-Strike competitive scene, currently holding the 55th position in the global HLTV rankings.

^[3] https://www.hltv.org/events/8316/blasttv-austin-major-2025-south-america-regional-qualifier; https://esportsinsider.com/2025/05/bestia-blast-austin-major-replaced-legacy. 

^[4] https://x.com/bestia_corp/status/1923752536499999112

^[5]https://esportsinsider.com/2025/05/blast-statement-bestia-austin-major-backlash; https://x.com/Team__Spirit/status/1925314139716477195 .

^[6] We regret to announce that @bestia_corp will no longer be participating in the upcoming BLAST tv Austin Major, as the team was unable to secure the required U.S. visas for a sufficient number of eligible players. #BLASTPremier #BLASTtvMAJOR” and “In their place, @legacyggbr the runner-up of the South American Major Regional Qualifier, will be stepping in to compete. We are pleased to confirm that Legacy has obtained all necessary travel documentation and will be attending the Austin Major.” https://x.com/BLASTtv/status/1925283921350087137; https://blast.tv/cs/news/bestia-to-be-replaced-by-legacy-at-the-austin-major

^[7] https://x.com/bestia_corp/status/1925713554058903794

^[8] This situation echoes prior precedents within the professional Counter-Strike circuit involving visa-related exclusions from Major tournaments. Notably, 100 Thieves were forced to withdraw from the ELEAGUE Major: Boston 2018 due to visa complications (100 Thieves, 2018). Similarly, 9Pandas were unable to participate in the PGL CS2 Major Copenhagen 2024 for analogous reasons (PGL, 2024).

^[9] The Austin Major will serve as the first Major appearance for BESTIA as an organization, after the Argentine side faltered in the RMRs of the last three Majors. Likewise, Austin will also be the first Major outing for all five players on the team’s lineup”. Ver: https://www.hltv.org/news/41474/nrg-and-bestia-finalize-blasttv-austin-major-team-lis

^[10] https://x.com/BLASTtv/status/1926299691903320281

^[11] https://www.hltv.org/news/41755/blast-shed-light-regarding-visa-case-bestia-prepare-to-mount-defense; https://www.hltv.org/news/41772/blast-hold-firm-on-major-substitution-bestia-ceo-threatens-legal-action

^[12] https://www.hltv.org/news/41772/blast-hold-firm-on-major-substitution-bestia-ceo-threatens-legal-action.

^[13] https://www.uscis.gov/working-in-the-united-states/temporary-nonimmigrant-workers

^[14] Justin M. Jacobson, Esq., The Essential Guide to the Business & Law of Esports & Professional Video Gaming, 90 (CRC Press 2021); https://esportslegal.news/esports-legal-wiki/immigration-employment/p-1-visa;  https://esportslegal.news/esports-legal-wiki/immigration-employment/o-1-visa/ .

^[15]https://www.uscis.gov/working-in-the-united-states/temporary-workers/o-1-visa-individuals-with-extraordinary-ability-or-achievement; https://www.latimes.com/business/la-fi-online-gamers-20130808-story.html; https://www.nbcnews.com/technolog/score-professional-video-gamers-awarded-athletic-visas-6c10679998.

^[16] https://esportsinsider.com/2023/07/consultation-letter-us-esports-visa; https://esportsta.org/visa-consultation-letters/

^[17] 8 CFR § 106.4(e)(6) & (7); https://www.uscis.gov/forms/all-forms/how-do-i-request-premium-processing

^[18] 8 CFR § 106.4(c)(6) & (7); https://egov.uscis.gov/processing-times

^[19] https://travel.state.gov/content/travel/en/us-visas/immigrate/the-immigrant-visa-process/step-10-prepare-for-the-interview.html

^[20] 8 CFR § 106.4(f)(3); https://www.uscis.gov/glossary-term/79521; https://www.uscis.gov/policy-manual/volume-1-part-e-chapter-6

^[21] https://www.uscis.gov/policy-manual/volume-7-part-b-chapter-3; https://www.dexerto.com/apex-legends/moist-apex-team-denied-us-visas-and-forced-to-play-pro-league-from-canada-2469358; https://sea.ign.com/esports/176213/news/the-most-memorable-visa-denials-involving-pinoy-esports-teams; https://afkgaming.com/esports/news/bringbrentoberlin-hashtag-trends-after-bren-esports-visa-denial-rumours; https://www.gosugamers.net/dota2/news/27892-update-four-of-five-arrow-gaming-players-denied-of-us-visa-application.

^[22] https://blast.tv/major/rulebook

^[23] https://github.com/ValveSoftware/counter-strike_rules_and_regs/blob/main/major-supplemental-rulebook.md

^[24] Justin M. Jacobson, Esq., The Essential Guide to the Business & Law of Esports & Professional Video Gaming, 90 (CRC Press 2021).

[25] Louise Reilly, Introduction to the Court of Arbitration for Sport (CAS) & the Role of National Courts in International Sports Disputes, An Symposium, 2012 J. Disp. Resol. (2012) Available at: https://scholarship.law.missouri.edu/jdr/vol2012/iss1/5.

[26] https://www.tas-cas.org/en/general-information/index.

[27] https://www.tas-cas.org/en/general-information/frequently-asked-questions.html.

[28] https://www.olympics.com/ioc/cas.

[29] https://sportsconflict.org; https://www.sportresolutions.com.

[30] https://www.sportresolutions.com/about/sport-resolutions.

[31] https://www.tas-cas.org/en/general-information/frequently-asked-questions.html.

^[32] https://esportsinsider.com/2024/05/moist-esports-sues-us-immigration-over-apex-legends-visa-issues; https://www.espn.com/gaming/story/_/id/14661486/breaking-league-legends-visa-issue; https://esportsinsider.com/2017/02/work-visas-in-esports.

^[33] https://iget.gg/; https://esportslegal.news/2025/01/29/esic-wipo-launch-iget-esports-tribunals

^[34] https://www.wipo.int/amc/en/center/specific-sectors/videogames/iget.html; https://esportslegal.news/2025/01/29/esic-wipo-launch-iget-esports-tribunal/.

^[35] https://www.iget.gg/model_clause.html; https://www.iget.gg/dispute_resolution_services.html

^[36] https://www.wipo.int/amc/en/center/specific-sectors/videogames/iget.html