Take-Two Loses Another Round in Court 88
IntelliAdmin writes "A federal judge refused a request from Take-Two Interactive Software to immediately dismiss some claims in a lawsuit accusing it of selling Grand Theft Auto videogames containing sexually explicit images under the wrong content label." From the article: "Take-Two and its subsidiary, Rockstar Games, had argued in the motion to dismiss parts of the lawsuit that the plaintiffs could only file claims in the states where they resided, not in all 50 states. But U.S. District Judge Shirley Wohl Kram denied Take-Two's motion and said she would reconsider if class-action status were granted in the case."
Dear Government, (Score:4, Insightful)
Sincerely,
Crying For Society....
Re: (Score:1)
Are you kidding!?
Look what happened when one breast was shown at the Super-Bowl.
I think the U.S. is slightly behind the times when it comes to these things.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Tom
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
If seeing polyboobies is REALLY a significant problem for our children...
Polyboobies were never really the issue. It has always been about political opportunism and legal extortion (otherwise know as frivolous lawsuits). Look at anyone who stands to benefit from this lawsuit and one sees this is the case.
There are reasons to be distressed about this issue, but the issue of concern is a justice system that is driven by, or at least manipulated by, ambition and avarice. The issues surrounding this g
Re: (Score:2)
I do but unfortunately my solution, "Kill everyone but me", has it's own problems, not the least of which is getting everyone to agree on who the "but me" part refers to.
Re: (Score:2)
The person with the biggest stick?
Of course, everyone would just start bragging about how big their stick is.
Re: (Score:2)
Sexually explicit? (Score:2)
Granted the whole thing was an easter egg but ... (Score:2)
Re:Granted the whole thing was an easter egg but . (Score:3, Insightful)
I don't know what the ESRB was supposed to do. They could've played the entire game, found all the hidden packages, completed every mission, achieved 100% completion of the game, and they'd still not have found the inaccessible digital boobs.
Re:Granted the whole thing was an easter egg but . (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
So what? In both cases you cannot see the content without a mod, and after applying a mod you can. The only difference is the size of the mod you have to apply, but the concept -- modifying the game -- is the same. The ESRB should not -- in fact cannot -- be responsible for modifications made to a game by users after it has been purchased.
Besides San Andreas could have been rated AO just on the basis that it has extended periods of
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
It only matters to people who don't understand the simple concept that applying a third-party mod to a game may change the content of that game.
The content was not in the game. There was no possible way for you to encounter that content in the game. You could only do so by changing the game.
If you didn't want to see bare breasts, and you never installed the Hot Coffee mod, you would never see any breasts, an
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Well if nobody who doesn't want to see boobies applied the Hot Coffee mod to the game, and thus none of them saw boobies in the game, what exactly is everyone complaining about? Since they didn't modify the game, the ESRB rating (which applies only to the unmodified game for what I pray to God are obvious reasons) was 100% accurate.
For the love! (Score:5, Insightful)
The problem is NOT that Rockstar included sexually explicit content in their game. The problem is that they released it under a rating that did not include knowledge of the sexually explicit material. Saying something like: "if children seeing polyboobies is a problem then blah blah blah" is a completely misleading statement.
This has absolutely NOTHING to do with children seeing boobies. It's the fact that Rockstar didn't DECLARE there were boobies to the ESRB. If a parent doesn't care about their child seeing digital boobs, then let the parent make an informed decision about the product up front. But stop saying that there's a problem with society because children seeing digital boobs is causing such a commotion. It's not.
Re: (Score:2)
This should be a NON-ISSUE because quite frankly, boobies GIVE LIFE to small children, they're a symbol of fertility in breeding age women, nothing more. I think teenagers can sort out what boobies are [even if they don't know how to manipulate them hehehehe] for.
This whole debate is nothing more than a class of inbred christ-fearing rightwing zealots imposing their illogical non-biological will on others.
I say let the titties flow!
Tom
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
I agree in the sense that my values are similar to yours. I disagree that you or I should enforce our sensitibilities on other people. If a parent doesn't want his/her kid seeing said polyboobies, who am I to tell that person they are wrong? Who
Re: (Score:2)
I'm all for having a choice whether your kids play/see/listen with media. What I hate is how they then enforce their values on others. Your kid may not handle polyboobies, but mine sure as heck will.
Tom
Re: (Score:2)
Considering that teen pregnancy is far more likely than a murderous rampage, then no, the chances aren't that similar.
"What I hate is how they then enforce their values on others."
By notifying you of what's in the game? Oh those value imposing bastards.
Re: (Score:2)
The sex scene exposed by Hot Coffee was not in the game, and hence there was no need to notify you of it.
The only notification that Rockstar/ESRB may be remiss in omitting is a warning that the ratings only apply to the un-modded game, and that if you apply a mod you may see things you don't want. I can't think of any way of wording this that doesn't sound snarky and condescending, because it's so bloody obvious. It'd be like having
Re: (Score:2)
The content was on the disc. The 'mod' simply unlocked it. I'm not saying I agree that they should have changed the rating, but I can certainly understand why it was contraversial and why Take Two drew fire over it.
"I can't think of any way of wording this that doesn't sound snarky and condescending, because it's so bloody obvious."
I understand what you're saying, but I don't agree that it's so 'bloo
Re: (Score:2)
On the disc, but not in the game. The mod, as the word implies, changed the behavior of the game. Without that mod, you would never see the content on the disc because it was not part of the game.
Yes, the mod simply unlocked it, but it doesn't matter how simple it was, it was a mod that made the content available. No mod, no content.
I understand what you're saying, but I don't agree that it's so 'bloody obvious'.
You don't think it's bloody obvious
Re: (Score:2)
Um, no, it was stupid hindsight or not. By then, Rockstar had already dealt with two previous GTA games.
"As far as it being "just a bit change", a single bit can change everything. What would be the practical difference between the existing Hot Coffee mod, and a mod which itself contained nude models/skins? The answer is the file size of the patch."
It means the traditionally non-mod'able version on
Re: (Score:2)
I'm not understanding why that's significant. Are you certain that GTA3/Vice City didn't contain disabled content that would go against the ESRB rating if it were enabled?
It means the traditionally non-mod'able version on the PS2 and XBOX could see the content. It wasn't just the PC version that was affected. I doubt this whole thing would have blown up otherwise.
Of course they're modable, or you wouldn'
Re: (Score:2)
Okay, let's clarify something here: I'm not saying the rating should have been changed in the first place. Honestly, I'm still on the fence about that. The key ingredients for me here are: 1. The content was on the disc. 2. It was easy to find and enable the content. 3. That franchise was under close scrutiny in the first place. R
Re: (Score:2)
Sure, I get what you're saying now. I don't see why it's important that it was easy to find; if it was somehow obfuscated, that would be okay then? The whole point was that it was extra material left around because other parts of the game may have still depended on parts of it.
Still you're right that they are under scrutiny and should have known better... maybe, like I said I'm still not sure Rockstar thinks this is a bad thing, and if so why would they go out of their way
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Nope. I'm saying teen-pregnancy has contributed to sex in video games being more contraversial than violence in video games. I'm talking about why parents would be concerned, not the actual effect.
Re: (Score:1)
The only ones doing that are Jack Thompson types.
Who am I to tell you what your kids can or cannot see?
See above.
In this case, it's simply a matter of making the information available on the box.
They did. Warns of violence and sexual content.
The games should be advertised properly.
Tbey did, see above.
Re: (Score:2)
Each parent has their own idea of what is and isn't appropriate for their kids. Sadly, I know people who won't let their kids read Harry Potter. I don't agree with that, but it's their kids and their perogative. As long as the game in question is properly labeled, they cannot blame the game publishers if they purchase something questionable. That's pretty much what's preventing some games from being flat out banned. It puts the responsibility of parent
Re: (Score:1)
Never mind the game NEVER displays that scene unless it's operated out of spec (compromising the game's save data) so those parents could just sit back knowing that their kid won't ever see that scene.
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2, Interesting)
The only way to access the sex scenes is to hack the game - and that's illegal thanks to the DMCA.
Re:For the love! (Score:5, Insightful)
That distinction will be hard to explain to the laypeople that will make up the jury in the case, but someone who's posting on "News for Nerds" should be able to grasp it.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1)
This leads to an interesting dilemma of how much 3rd party content is required for it to be a 'mod' ? Oblivion hackers applied a male skin to a female mesh to create boobies, does this count?
Re: (Score:2)
And a modded GTA game does not in itself offend, only when it is played. Maybe a bathing suit isn't the best analogy, but it's suitable because the principle is the same: You have to take a deliberate action to change t
Re:For the love! - better analogy (Score:2)
The hole was there all along, but it was patched so no one would see it under normal conditions. By modifying the suit/game, you exposed a "hidden detail" of the original item but it can hardly be said that the manufacturer intended to
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
I make furniture, but as a joke, I paint erotic pictures on the wood under the upholstery. Now, as long as people use it as furniture and don't take apart the product, no harm done.
Am I selling porn?
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
I believe that according to Fair Use rights in the USA, the entity that purchased your piece of furniture has the right to use it in any way they see fit, including dismantling it. You have no say in usage. If the erotic depictions fall under the accepted definition of pornography, then yeah, you might be selling porn. (Although intent might play a role.)
The difference may be in the fact that when you buy Software (according to the EULA), you are purchasing a license to use the software, and are granted
Re: (Score:2)
Despite the fact that third party hacks had to be applied to the game to access said boobage...
It is not uncommon practice for developers to leave unused code/content in their software. You can find examples of this everywhere if you take a hex editor to just about any program and read the developer comments. This is stuff intentionally made to never be seen by the end user in the final product, and are merely in there for evaluation/
Re: (Score:1)
Now, I honestly think that "families against bad videogames" ty
Re: (Score:2)
Second thing: The content was not actually accessible. It existed, but that is not the same thing as accessible. A really good la
Re: (Score:2)
Maybe it wasn't specifically disclosed to ESRB, but that descriptor alone sure seems enough.
They didn't .... (Score:2)
Big difference. The ESRB rating on the games is accurate for the game as shipped. There is nothing more explicit than gaining health for having hookers crawl into your car. Hot Coffee is a MOD - ie, you have to modify the game to see it. This whole suit is about people being up in arms about the game being changed after the sale. I never saw the issue.
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
I'm sorry, I would walk into court with a sealed copy of the game, a PC & hand them to the plantif's attourney & say, "OK, show me this content we misrepresented. Oh, you can't do it, then how did we misrepresent what we sold? The game, as sold, was valid for it's initial rating."
Oh yeah, that clears it up. (Score:2)
There were no boobies to declare.
There were no boobies until you applied a modification to the game downloaded off the internet.
At the point at which you are applying a modification to the game, does it matter if the mod is just unlocking previously innaccessible content on the disk, or if the mod contained the boobies itself? You're modifying the game from its original,
Re: (Score:1)
If a tree falls in the woods when no one is around, does it make a sound?
So you're telling me that if your Sister is in a locked room that you can't get to, but she's having sex with your Father, if you break into the room, it's YOUR FAULT for seeing it?
Re: (Score:2)
But someone is around -- you, the person who chopped the tree down. The tree was not going to fall until you came up to it with an axe, chopped it down, cried "Timber!", and then got upset that the tree fell and made a loud noise. Getting all existential about it after the fact -- "Sure I cut the tree down, but it already had the potential to fall and I just unlocked it!" -- doesn't change anything.
So you're telling me that if your S
Re: (Score:2)
If there was an "Iced Tea" mod that put beastiality into the game, would it be Rockstar's fault for not notifying the ESRB that their game might, at some point in the future, depending on what internet modders do, contain beastiality?
"This game may be altered by mods. It is therefore an existential paradox, in that it may possibly contain our entire existence, perceived reality, and infinite time, and/or possibly consisting of an utter nothingness devoid of matter, energy, and measurement."
That shoul
Re: (Score:2)
Scarlett Johannson has boobies, under her clothes. It's a biological fact.
But you don't see anyone going around complaining that all the movies she is in should be rated R or above due to the presence of boobies. They're not accessible in the content as released, thus they are not relevant, and the studio doesn't need to mention her boobies specifically when they submit
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
This is exactly identical to suing a game company because one of the comments in the code contains the word 'fuck' and they didn't declare this to the ESRB.
Re: (Score:2)
Still don't get this... (Score:3, Insightful)
Why hasn't Rockstar/Take Two launched counter-suits against people who have used the Hot Coffee hack and are outraged by it?
Two words (Score:2, Interesting)
Gotta love the free advertising and scandals..It's like jack Thompson. It's not a big deal, but they fight it out to get the name out there without paying ungodly advertising costs.
Because they have no grounds (Score:1)
Re: (Score:1)
The DMCA outlaws any and all types of modification - regardless of the purpose or audience - that requires reverse engineering, decompilation or other forms of hacking.
Heck, just dumping a save file into a binary editor is a violation of the DMCA.
(enforcement is another matter...)
For the curious... (Score:3, Interesting)
Not as tame as the Sims/Sim2 w/o the pixel blur, but it is a bit more graphic than Janet's nipple. Though I recall seeing about as much skin as a kid when my mom's soaps were on the tube.
Funny how our standards (as a society) change over time. Anyone remember the full-frontal nudity of a baby Clark Kent in the theater release of Superman in the 70's (PG)? Or how about those obviously gratitous bare breasts briefly flashed in the foreground on the panic scene in Airplane (also PG).
Damned puritan nation...
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Both of those were PG before PG-13 [wikipedia.org] was created as a rating (1984).
So, it's possible that had such a rating existed back then, they might've been rated PG-13 and not PG.
Have social standards changed? Probably. (although, both would likely score below 'R' and above 'G', so it's hard to tell in this particular case if they'd be rated PG or PG-13).
Re: (Score:2)
There was more real nudity in PG movies in the 70s/80s than there is in today's PG-13 movies. Hell, even in today's (American)
Re: (Score:2)
your car (Score:2)
Good news, everybody! (Score:2)
So, who wants to get in on the "ID" lawsuit with me? I mean, I got the game, then downloaded something that made the game do a naughty, within the game mechanics. That's close enough.
But you added content (Score:2)
This case is a real head-scratcher because Rockstar included the nudity - BUT they did not include any way to view it with the game that shipped! It's basically almost as if you had sold a movie on a DVD with a hidden pornographic JPG that only a computer could access by browsing files. In that case, should the movie have an X rating even though a DVD player would never show it?
It seems like Rockstar should win this one but it is more complex than a
Re: (Score:2)
Did parents even read the game box? (Score:1)
Re: (Score:1)
Exactly - we've got an adult rated game in which the character is an criminal who can kill innocent people with a flame-thrower, beat police to death with baseball bats, get "serviced" by hookers and then kill them and take the money back, etc, etc...
But, allow a little simulated nudity and sex and there is an outcry. The hypocrisy is ludicrous. No 10-year-old should be playing this game. That's why it is rated 17+ in the US, 18 certificated in the UK. But if parents allow their child to play this game th