This Pokémon director filmed women and girls in bathrooms for 9 years.

THE FACTS

On July 30, 2026, a class action complaint was filed in King County Superior Court (Case No. 26-2-24570-3 SEA) against The Pokémon Company International, Inc., a Delaware corporation with its principal place of business in Bellevue, Washington. The named plaintiff, identified in court documents as Jane Doe 1, is an employee who was secretly recorded while using the company’s restroom facilities.

The defendant at the center of the allegations is Ben Tsai, who was employed by Pokémon Company from 2017 through 2026 as Director of Engineering at the Bellevue location. According to the complaint, Tsai “illegally and illicitly placed hidden cameras in Pokémon Company restroom facilities and video recorded individuals who used the restroom.” The recordings captured victims “in varying states of undress,” including employees, visitors, and children.

Law enforcement investigators discovered that Tsai saved at least some of the videos on his computer in folders explicitly named “Pokémon 29” and “Pokémon 27.” The complaint states that investigators determined Tsai transmitted at least 200 messages, many containing child sexual abuse material, and that a messaging application on his devices contained 680 videos stored in folders of “various subjects, including adult nudity and child sexual abuse material.”

Tsai has been criminally charged with Voyeurism and Possession of depictions of minor engaged in explicit conduct – first degree. The complaint alleges that Tsai was engaged in the commercial distribution of sexual abuse material and voyeurism videos.

The plaintiff and proposed class members allege they did not give permission to Tsai or Pokémon Company to record or surveil them. The class definition encompasses “all women and girls who used the bathroom facilities at Pokémon Company from 2017 through July 25, 2026,” and includes two sub-classes: employees and members of the public who visited the Bellevue office.

THE MISCONDUCT

Corporate Knowledge and the Duty to Protect

The core legal argument in the complaint is that Pokémon Company either knew or should have known about the risk Tsai posed. The lawsuit alleges the company “failed to properly train and supervise its employee, Ben Tsai, and failed to properly respond to indicators of his illicit activities and the danger he posed to employees and members of the public.”

The complaint specifically notes that “the risk was highlighted by the nature of the products marketed and sold and events held at its locations where the public, particularly children, were invited and encouraged to attend.” In other words, Pokémon Company operates a business that attracts families and minors, creating a heightened duty of care.

Under Washington law, the complaint invokes multiple theories of employer liability, including special relationships under Restatement (Second) of Torts §315, the duty to control servants acting outside the scope of employment under §317, and the duty to refrain from affirmative acts that expose victims to foreseeable harm under §302B.

Strict Liability Under Washington Anti-Discrimination Law

The lawsuit’s most aggressive legal claim is rooted in the Washington Law Against Discrimination, Chapter 49.60 RCW. The complaint alleges Pokémon Company is strictly liable because:

• The acts occurred while victims were utilizing a place of public accommodation.
• The acts resulted in distinction, restriction, or discrimination by treating victims differently than persons outside their protected class (gender).
• The victims’ protected status as women and girls was a substantial factor causing the discriminatory treatment.

This legal theory eliminates the need to prove the company had actual knowledge or intent. The statute holds the employer accountable for the discriminatory acts of its employees when those acts occur in a space covered by public accommodation law.

“Tsai engaged in these recording activities based on the gender of the Plaintiff and the Class members, who were treated differently from other employees, students, and visitors of a different gender.”

The Commercial Exploitation Allegation

The complaint repeatedly references “commercial exploitation” of the voyeurism videos. While the exact financial details are not disclosed, the allegation that Tsai was “engaged in the commercial distribution of sexual abuse material and voyeurism videos, including videos captured by Tsai of Class members” suggests the harm extended beyond privacy invasion into trafficking of exploitative material.

This elevates the case from workplace negligence into a scenario where the employer may be held liable for enabling a commercial sex abuse operation on its premises.

THE NON-FINANCIAL LEDGER

Jane Doe 1 is an employee. She went to work. She used a bathroom at her place of employment. For approximately five years, she was unknowingly filmed. The complaint does not specify how many times she was recorded, because she doesn’t know. The videos are evidence in a criminal case. She may never know the full extent of her exploitation.

The class includes children. The complaint explicitly states that the videos contained “child sexual abuse material” and that victims included “individuals, including children, employees and members of the public.” These are not abstract legal categories. These are minors who visited a Pokémon office—likely for events, tours, or family activities—and were filmed in a bathroom by a senior company executive.

There is no settlement amount yet. There is no damage calculation that can quantify what it means to discover, years later, that your body was surveilled and recorded in a private space. The complaint seeks “all special and general damages established at trial,” which means the financial reckoning will be determined by a jury if the case proceeds.

But the real ledger is this: Hundreds of women and girls used a bathroom between 2017 and 2026. Some were employees who went to that bathroom daily. Some were children who visited once. All of them have now been notified, or will be, that their most private moments may have been captured, stored, and potentially distributed.

The complaint alleges that Tsai’s recordings were made “for his sexual gratification, and/or commercial exploitation through distribution of the videos.” This is not paranoia. This is the allegation of the lawsuit, supported by the criminal charges and the evidence law enforcement recovered.

Dignity is not a damages category in civil litigation, but it is the first casualty. Trust in institutions is the second. The belief that a workplace or a public venue will protect you is the third. For the victims in this case, all three are gone.

LEGAL RECEIPTS

“The Pokémon Company is strictly liable for damages caused by the secretive and illicit acts of voyeurism of its employee Ben Tsai under the Washington Law Against Discrimination, Chapter 49.60 RCW et seq., because (1) such acts were done while Plaintiffs were utilizing a place of public accommodation, (2) such acts constitute acts that directly or indirectly resulted in distinction, restriction, and/or discrimination of the Plaintiffs by treating them in a manner different to the treatment provided to persons outside Plaintiffs’ protected class, and (3) Plaintiffs’ protected status was a substantial factor that caused the distinctive, restrictive, and/or discriminatory treatment of Plaintiffs.”
— Complaint, ¶2

“The voyeurism and resultant damages were the result of Defendant’s failure to control Tsai and to otherwise protect Plaintiffs from his predatory behavior.”
— Complaint, ¶3

“Upon information and belief, the recordings were made and kept by Tsai for any or all of the following purposes: (1) his sexual gratification, and/or (2) commercial exploitation through distribution of the videos.”
— Complaint, ¶15

“Law enforcement has determined that Tsai transmitted at least 200 messages, many of which contained child sexual abuse material. The same investigators determined that the messaging application used to send those videos contained 680 stored in a folder of various subjects, including adult nudity and child sexual abuse material.”
— Complaint, ¶17

“The Pokémon Company’s failure to implement and enforce adequate policies and procedures and to appropriately train its employees was a moving force that resulted in the pervasive and enduring invasion of privacy perpetrated by its employee.”
— Complaint, ¶33

SOCIETAL IMPACT MAPPING

Public Health

The psychological harm from voyeurism is well-documented. Victims experience symptoms consistent with trauma: hypervigilance, loss of safety in previously routine environments, and intrusive thoughts. For the class members in this case, the harm is compounded by uncertainty. Many victims may not know whether they were recorded. The anxiety of not knowing can be as damaging as confirmed exposure.

For the children involved, the harm is developmentally catastrophic. Research on child sexual abuse material shows that the knowledge of exploitation—regardless of physical contact—causes long-term psychological injury. The children in this case were victimized in a setting their families trusted.

Economic Inequality

Employer liability cases like this one expose the power imbalance inherent in workplace surveillance and safety failures. Tsai held a senior position as Director of Engineering. The complaint alleges he was a supervisor. This is a case where the person responsible for protecting institutional security was the perpetrator.

The class members who were employees faced a double betrayal: their employer failed to protect them, and their supervisor exploited them. The visitors and children in the class trusted a corporate brand and were violated in a space that should have been safe.

The financial damages in this case, when calculated, will reveal the cost-benefit analysis the company made when it failed to implement adequate supervision, training, and monitoring systems. Corporations weigh the cost of prevention against the cost of liability. This lawsuit will force that calculus into public view.

Environmental Degradation (Not Applicable)

This case does not involve environmental harm.

THE “COST OF A LIFE” METRIC

WHAT NOW?

The complaint names the following defendants:

• The Pokémon Company International, Inc. – Foreign corporation incorporated in Delaware, principal place of business in Bellevue, Washington.
• Ben Tsai – Resident of King County, Washington, former Director of Engineering.
• Jane Doe Tsai – Named as part of Ben Tsai’s marital community under Washington community property law.

The lawsuit is being brought by Washington Law Center (attorney Ashton K. Dennis) and Pfau Cochran Vertetis Amala PLLC (attorneys Darrell L. Cochran, Thomas B. Vertetis, and Alexander G. Dietz).

If you were employed by or visited The Pokémon Company International’s Bellevue, Washington office between 2017 and July 2026, you may be a member of this class. Contact the attorneys listed in the complaint for information about your rights. Document your visits, employment dates, and any communications with the company. Victim advocacy organizations such as RAINN (Rape, Abuse & Incest National Network) provide confidential support for survivors of voyeurism and sexual exploitation.

Support local labor organizing efforts that demand transparency in workplace surveillance policies. Advocate for state legislation requiring annual third-party audits of employer safety and anti-discrimination training programs. Corporate self-regulation failed here. It will fail again unless external accountability is mandated by law.