Beta
×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Miami Court Orders Take Two to Hand Over Bully

samzenpus posted more than 7 years ago | from the hand-it-over-or-else dept.

349

Jabrwock writes "GamePolitics.com reports that a judge in Miami ruled that Take Two Interactive, makers of the controversial title Bully, must hand over a copy of the soon to be released game to the court within 24 hours. Jack Thompson, the plaintiff, called the ruling a 'huge victory against the violent video game industry', although Take Two can still appeal the order. Thompson filed a lawsuit asking the court to label Bully a 'public nuisance' and restrict its October 17 release in Florida."

cancel ×

349 comments

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

Are they actually restricting sales of the game? (4, Interesting)

rdwald (831442) | more than 7 years ago | (#16402237)

Does this ruling actually affect sales of the game, or is it just to let the judge play the game himself and see if it's actually as bad as Thompson claims?

Re:Are they actually restricting sales of the game (2, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#16402275)

This kind of publicity will only increase sales for rockstar.

The ruling is so that it can be assessed by somebody within the court.

Re:Are they actually restricting sales of the game (2, Insightful)

Astarica (986098) | more than 7 years ago | (#16402647)

Take Two lost millions due to the Hot Coffee mod (repackaging cost, recall cost, lost sales, etc).

Not all publicity is good.

Re:Are they actually restricting sales of the game (4, Insightful)

Steeltalon (734391) | more than 7 years ago | (#16402379)

What blows my mind is that this is the guy who suggested that someone should make a game where the president of Take 2 Interactive and her family are killed... and then blew off the $10,000 he offered should someone make that game. Where the **** does he get the moral authority, let alone professional authority -- I mean, he's a lawyer, and knows about the game industry only in an academic sense, and I say that using the loosest definition of academic possible -- to judge whether Bully is acceptable. He's a God fearing man. Would it be so bad for God to drop an anvil on him?

Re:Are they actually restricting sales of the game (1)

TheDreadSlashdotterD (966361) | more than 7 years ago | (#16402567)

The real question is whether or not a game about Jack dropping an anvil on God would be okay. How about King George (the Texan, not the Brit)?

Re:Are they actually restricting sales of the game (2, Insightful)

Otter Escaping North (945051) | more than 7 years ago | (#16402459)

Does this ruling actually affect sales of the game, or is it just to let the judge play the game himself and see if it's actually as bad as Thompson claims?

Judge says he wants to see 100 hours of game play. Thing is - there isn't much more time than that between the handover deadline and the game's release...

Re:Are they actually restricting sales of the game (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#16402773)

"Does this ruling actually affect sales of the game"

All I know is that the more awful the game sounds the more I want to get a copy! ;-)

Gots to have my shoot 'em ups as realz as possible!

And when is the next Unreal Tournament being release? :-P

the bully getting bullied? (1)

Bizzeh (851225) | more than 7 years ago | (#16402239)

the bully getting bullied?

Ahh Jack... (5, Insightful)

kypper (446750) | more than 7 years ago | (#16402245)

You won't stop until someone who's played GTA actually kills you, will you?

Honestly, we all want you to die not because we're violent, sadistic bastards, but because you just won't stop wasting our tax dollars on this horse-shit.

Re:Ahh Jack... (5, Funny)

kypper (446750) | more than 7 years ago | (#16402289)

Ahh Jack...
(Score:1, Flamebait)
by kypper (446750) on 20:26 Wednesday 11 October 2006 (#16402245)
(http://slashdot.org/)


Hey, I didn't know Jack Thompson got mod points!

Re:Ahh Jack... (4, Insightful)

jackbird (721605) | more than 7 years ago | (#16402313)

Tax dollars? Jack Thompson is a private asshat, not a public servant.

Re:Ahh Jack... (4, Insightful)

cduffy (652) | more than 7 years ago | (#16402353)

However, he's a private asshat who spends a lot of time persuading public servants (like the judge in question) to spend their time on his pet issues.

Re:Ahh Jack... (2, Interesting)

jackbird (721605) | more than 7 years ago | (#16402405)

Well, filing fees are supposed to cover that to a degree, and it's very much a public good to make our judicial process accessible to anyone with a beef, no matter how unlikely.

Re:Ahh Jack... (2, Interesting)

FreyarHunter (760978) | more than 7 years ago | (#16402829)

Who is he representing? I'm not a lawyer myself but I thought you can only bring up a case if you have been directly affected by an incident, or had an immeidate family member affected.

No one can really be effected by Bully as it hasn't been released so why are judges even hearing these cases?

Re:Ahh Jack... (5, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#16402873)

Well, filing fees are supposed to cover that to a degree, and it's very much a public good to make our judicial process accessible to anyone with a beef, no matter how unlikely.


Um, duh. But it's not in the public good for asshats to use the judicial process to sue over the same issue over and over again trying to use different laws or jurisdictions each time to achieve the same result whether our system makes that possible or not.

I mean, it's a public good for 911 to respond seriously to every call. That doesn't mean it's a public good when people crank call 911 dozens of times.

Re:Ahh Jack... (1)

Babbster (107076) | more than 7 years ago | (#16402889)

You might have a point if this was a non-lawyer acting without counsel, but JT is a lawyer who is supposed to know better and not file frivolous, baseless lawsuits. [Insert usual disclaimer] but this seems to me an attempt at "prior restraint." Unless somehow this videogame is a threat to "national security" (e.g., containing top-secret material as opposed to containing potentially, morally objectionable material) then until Bully is actually on store shelves there shouldn't be any reasonable legal case regarding its content. The fact that the judge is even entertaining JT's frivolity is just a damn shame and makes the court system look stupid.

Re:Ahh Jack... (3, Insightful)

Jah-Wren Ryel (80510) | more than 7 years ago | (#16402891)

Well, filing fees are supposed to cover that to a degree

Don't think it even comes close, the law is expensive because lawyers like it that way.

and it's very much a public good to make our judicial process accessible to anyone with a beef, no matter how unlikely.

As far as I have read, nobody has said that neither he nor anyone else should not have the right to make an ass of himself. But that doesn't mean we have to be happy or supportive of his actions. He's got a right to be an ass, and we have the right to call him an ass for doing it.

Re:Ahh Jack... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#16402355)

Who do you think pays for the judge's time, retard?

Re:Ahh Jack... (1)

NormalVisual (565491) | more than 7 years ago | (#16402361)

But they're public courts whose time he continues to waste.

Re:Ahh Jack... (1)

From A Far Away Land (930780) | more than 7 years ago | (#16402651)

The court system is publicly funded. And I think judges would do better to spend their time keeping innocent people out of jail, than looking at litigation from hyper lawyers with grudges against a computer industry.

Re:Ahh Jack... (1, Troll)

Jackass Thompson (932628) | more than 7 years ago | (#16402897)

You're insulting me. Give me $11 million.

--
I am the Great Jackholio. Are you threatening me?

Re:Ahh Jack... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#16402547)

I second that. What the hell, on no, you pull a fire alarm in a game and that's going to make someone pull one in real life. Who gives a crap.

Re:Ahh Jack... (5, Funny)

Jackass Thompson (932628) | more than 7 years ago | (#16402737)

That'a a threat. Stop Threatening me. -- Are you threatening me? I am the Great Jackholio.

Re:Ahh Jack... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#16402823)

OMG MOD THE PARENT FUNNY

Re:Ahh Jack... (2, Funny)

antic (29198) | more than 7 years ago | (#16402935)

You won't stop until someone who's played GTA actually kills you, will you?


I've been training hard, but I just can't get past the flying training in San Andreas!

A good read... (5, Informative)

ack154 (591432) | more than 7 years ago | (#16402247)

Someone has already had a hands on review [feedburner.com] of the game... Dear ole Jack won't be the first.

Don't misread the article summary (3, Informative)

TubeSteak (669689) | more than 7 years ago | (#16402481)

Dear ole Jack won't be the first.
I'm not sure if you misread the article summary (I did at first), but the court isn't ordering a copy of the game be turned over to "Dear ole Jack"

The Judge ordered Take Two to provide a copy of the game so the Judge can sit around and make up his own mind over the contents of the game.

Maybe Take Two should provide the Judge with the same footage that they provided to the ESRB?

Re:Don't misread the article summary (2, Funny)

Nephilium (684559) | more than 7 years ago | (#16402599)

No one has seen the obvious... the judge is a gamer, and wants to play it pre-release!

Brilliant!

Nephilium

"I was neat, clean, shaved and sober, and I didn't care who knew it." -- The Big Sleep (Chapter 1)

Jack's Psychosis (1, Interesting)

Chibi-Hikaru (969350) | more than 7 years ago | (#16402257)

Thompson needs to stop projecting his sick mind on the masses.

He makes everyone else named "Jack" look bad... (1)

mrchaotica (681592) | more than 7 years ago | (#16403027)

...so maybe we ought to sue him for defamation of character (hey, it'd be less friviolous than his lawsuit)!

Nothing worse (4, Insightful)

tomstdenis (446163) | more than 7 years ago | (#16402279)

than uninformed asshats with a cause all in the name of "saving the children."

Why not protest the war or lack of education funding in the more poorer districts? I think children need more, oh I dunno, text books and trained staff than they need protection from "the boogie woogies" of video games...

Oh right, cuz the guy is a press whore no-talent assclown who just wants to be known as the biggest loser in the world. /me loves me some video games...

Tom

Re:Nothing worse (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#16402373)

Except for maybe starting your sentence in the subject line. That's worse.

Re:Nothing worse (-1, Flamebait)

tomstdenis (446163) | more than 7 years ago | (#16402389)

I wouldn't be so pedantic about my grammar. Your mother speaks far worse in the bed, at least she did last night.

Tom

Just wait until the see the sequel: (3, Funny)

monopole (44023) | more than 7 years ago | (#16402527)

"Foley" in which you play a Congressman and the Chairman of the "Missing and Exploited Children Commitee". In the game you pursue pages and ...

Just think of the children!!!

Re:Nothing worse (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#16402683)

or lack of education funding in the more poorer districts?

Such as in yours, for example?

I don't know what it was exactly (1)

zepo1a (958353) | more than 7 years ago | (#16402293)

But that summary made me laugh out loud...for real. For pete's sake Jack..it's a GAME for crying out loud. Please find something better to (not) waste your law school education on.

Given the average intelligence... (1, Insightful)

tehSpork (1000190) | more than 7 years ago | (#16402315)

Given the average intelligence of the people assosiated with Jack Thompson and his anti-videogame 'movement', I doubt any of them are smart enough to actualy get the computer game installed and running, much less have the skill to get past even the first stages of the game.

And what good is him having an advance copy going to do anyone, other than the fact that he will have a few extra words to the rants he's been making about the game from day 1. Heck, I didn't even know about the game until I heard him blabbing about it. Maybe he should realize that he's just turned into free advertising for the game and shut up?

Nahh, that would be too mature a move for him. He's content to make a fool out of himself, again.

Re:Given the average intelligence... (1)

ack154 (591432) | more than 7 years ago | (#16402347)

Heck, I didn't even know about the game until I heard him blabbing about it.

Same here. Had no idea... but now that I've heard of it (thanks to Jack) and seen some footage and reviews, I want it and will probably get it.

Thanks for the heads up Jack!

Re:Given the average intelligence... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#16402381)

lets make a game where you can shoot jack thompsons balls off, then hogtie and toss him in a river with sharks with friggin lazers on their heads..

i wonder how well he'll take it.

Re:Given the average intelligence... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#16402755)

"Maybe he should realize that he's just turned into free advertising for the game and shut up?"

Maybe this is Take Two's plan all along...

Re:Given the average intelligence... (4, Funny)

Cheapy (809643) | more than 7 years ago | (#16402813)

Since when was ad hominem Insightful?

Re:Given the average intelligence... (1)

GweeDo (127172) | more than 7 years ago | (#16403055)

Since when do you install a PS2 game?

That's A Horrible Ruling: Wait For The Appeal (4, Insightful)

logicnazi (169418) | more than 7 years ago | (#16402329)

I don't just mean it reaches a bad result. This really is just bad law as well as bad policy.

A fundamental bedrock of first ammendment jurisprudence is the principle of no prior restraint. Sure the court has unfortunatly carved some exceptions where individuals might be fined or even prosecuted for the content of their work (obscene material with no redeming literary/scientific value) but it has universally struck down anything that even smacks of prior restraint. Obviously any damages can be sought after the game is released and the only reason to submit it now is to achieve something like judicial approval for their game. Such an action flies in the face of long established first ammendment jurisprudence.

I suspect Thompson just found a sympathetic local judge who either didn't know or didn't like the clear first ammendment case law on prior restraint. Then again maybe the publishers didn't protest too loudly knowing they could have it reversed on appeal and it would get them great publicity. In either case I don't doubt that this will quickly be reversed.

Re:That's A Horrible Ruling: Wait For The Appeal (3, Insightful)

Shadow Wrought (586631) | more than 7 years ago | (#16402407)

You would be correct if the Judge had actually issued a ruling against Rockstar. All he's said is that he'd like to see the game. That can also be for an appeal so that when Jeck loses and appeals it, the lower court can demonstrate how fair it was to Jack's case.

Re:That's A Horrible Ruling: Wait For The Appeal (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#16402607)

Why don't you make that sig a little bigger and more obnoxious?

Re:That's A Horrible Ruling: Wait For The Appeal (4, Informative)

TubeSteak (669689) | more than 7 years ago | (#16402577)

A fundamental bedrock of first ammendment jurisprudence is the principle of no prior restraint. ... Obviously any damages can be sought after the game is released and the only reason to submit it now is to achieve something like judicial approval for their game. Such an action flies in the face of long established first ammendment jurisprudence.
Jack Thompson is attacking this game as a public nuisance.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Public_nuisance [wikipedia.org]

He's saying the game will create an ongoing danger to the local community & because of this, the game should not be sold (in that Florida jurisdiction).

This isn't prior restraint because he is not attacking the content of the game, merely its ultimate effect on the community.

His legal action very cleverly does not have to even go near the issue of Constitutional Law.

Re:That's A Horrible Ruling: Wait For The Appeal (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#16402839)


His legal action very cleverly does not have to even go near the issue of Constitutional Law.

What country are you talking about, exactly? For that matter, what planet?

Re:That's A Horrible Ruling: Wait For The Appeal (2, Insightful)

Babbster (107076) | more than 7 years ago | (#16402943)

What are you talking about? Since you decided to provide a wiki link to public nuisance, you should probably read the one on prior restraint [wikipedia.org] . JT is attempting to prevent publication of material based on its content - that is the definition of prior restraint. The idea that his suit could possibly have merit (the courts have made very few rulings upholding prior restraint, and usually only do so when the government makes national security claims) is just silly. One might as well have argued that "Kill Bill" should have been sued out of existence - oh, but that's right, movies are art while Rockstar's videogames are "murder simulators."

Re:That's A Horrible Ruling: Wait For The Appeal (5, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#16402797)

This is precisely equivalent to a court ordering an author to hand over their soon-to-be published book beforehand so the government can scrutinize it. Since no anti-expression laws (such as defamation) apply until after publication, there is no fathomable basis for the government to have a pre-release copy of the software title. It is not like the government can do the prior restraint of stopping the games release. So this court has very much overstepped its bounds. Some (far too many?) judges just do not understand the law. You do not get to break the Constitution just because you wear a robe or get elected to Congress.

A huge Victory! (2, Interesting)

PieSquared (867490) | more than 7 years ago | (#16402331)

Yes, that's right, a huge victory for Jack. He finally got his hands on a copy of a video game before release!

Obviously since nobody else has played this game yet, it will be a major loss to the gaming industry. Certainly there aren't already copies in the hands of video game reviewers, or any store or... wait? There are? *How* many people have played it?

I'm not quite sure how this is a major victory, other then that he found a(another?) judge to play ball with him.

Re:A huge Victory! (1)

sTalking_Goat (670565) | more than 7 years ago | (#16402597)

It's pretty obvious what his plan it. Now that he's obtained a copy before release he can upload it unto the net where all the kids can download it and play it for free ensuring Take-Two doesn't make a profit.

It's downright ingenius

What ever happened to parents? (5, Insightful)

lemur3 (997863) | more than 7 years ago | (#16402333)

Maybe it is just me? It's the "think of the children" crowd who are a public nuisance.

I think it shows a large amount of disrespect toward parents (and adult gamers) all over to have a Judge/Plaintiff deciding what is good or bad for the public when it comes to video games or art or entertainment.

Re:What ever happened to parents? (1)

rpillala (583965) | more than 7 years ago | (#16402959)

How many parents do you know? 100? 200?

I've met at least 3000 parents over the last 10 years as a teacher. There are lots of incompetent folks out there.

Why is a video game a nuisance and not a book? (5, Insightful)

Hamster Lover (558288) | more than 7 years ago | (#16402337)

Last time I checked the First Amendment was still in the constitution. How is a video game a public nuisance, whatever that means, and subject to extraordinary examination that would never pass constitutional muster if applied to a book or movie?

Re:Why is a video game a nuisance and not a book? (2)

geekoid (135745) | more than 7 years ago | (#16402617)

By claiming it will insite people to violence would make it a public nuisance.

Re:Why is a video game a nuisance and not a book? (1)

Aerokii (1001189) | more than 7 years ago | (#16402887)

While I agree that the First Amendment applies completely to this topic, and instead of having the courts censor games, parents should, you know, do their job and watch their kid, I have to disagree with the arguement that books are just as bad as video games. While I have seen some really disturbed things in books, mainly because I read Stephen King, one has to realise that most people are more likely to play a video game than they are to read a book. That may not be true for most of the slashdot crowd, since its rare to find this many people who can carry on an intelligent conversation, but for the general population, it holds true.

Most people, at least around where I live, don't read unless its school forced, and that stuff's pretty heavily censored by the administration. The games, however, are either censored by the parents, or not censored at all. Also something to consider: Is a parent more likely to ban a video game than they might be to ban a book? The child would still be reading, at least, opposed to just playing games.

I guess the point I'm trying to make is that books won't have as wide an affect on most kids as video games will. While I realise there are special cases, such as Harry Potter, for the most part, a kid's more likely to play a game than read a book.

Sounds Worse Than It Is (5, Insightful)

KU_Fletch (678324) | more than 7 years ago | (#16402341)

Thompson is bringing a claim to the court that the game constitutes a menace. Since the game isn't actually out yet, the judge has no way to proceed with this claim until he sees the product. I fully anticipate he'll view it for a few days, take a few days of consultation, and then reach a sumary judgement for the defendants. You'll be hard pressed to find a judge willing to prohibit free speech or free commerce of this kind. Blocking the sale of a legal commerical product won't pass much constitutional scrutiny and would be thrown out in an instant by a higher court.

This is just Jack Thompson wanting attention for his upcoming book (hell, he called his co-author as a witness). Giving him attention is letting him win.

Re:Sounds Worse Than It Is (1, Insightful)

tehwebguy (860335) | more than 7 years ago | (#16402549)

the problem is, as far as i'm concerned, is that the judge shouldn't be able to order something like this.

Re:Sounds Worse Than It Is (1)

pcgamez (40751) | more than 7 years ago | (#16402901)

I understand and agree (in a way) with what you are saying. The problem here is that by ordering the game produced, he is in fact saying that a game CAN be a public nuisance. That in itself is a hirrible precedent.

Re:Sounds Worse Than It Is (1)

Lehk228 (705449) | more than 7 years ago | (#16403057)

Surely the Goskomizdat [wikipedia.org] must review the game before publication, eh comrade?

makes my head spin (0)

phyruxus (72649) | more than 7 years ago | (#16402345)

I always thought the furor over GTA and suchlike was foamy-mouthed zealotry from technophobic churchladies. This alters my perspective. The subject matter is enough to royally piss me off, but I'm not sure whether that's enough to make me agree with censorship. I'd like to say that freedom outweighs all other considerations. I really would. But on a personal level I have to wait to see what shakes out.

Re:makes my head spin (4, Informative)

Xiroth (917768) | more than 7 years ago | (#16402453)

Congrats, you fell into Thompson's trap. Now why don't you have a read of what the game is really about [arstechnica.com] (as linked in an earlier comment).

Standing (1)

MrLint (519792) | more than 7 years ago | (#16402357)

Other than Jerk Thompson's, how on earth does this case exist? On what grounds is the court asking for review? I am just at a lack here to understand how this would work. How does JT claim he deserves pre-release software for his own gratification? Not to mention that i doubt this would hold up on appeal with what I assume are amazingly specious claims.

Defense Exhibit A: America's Army (5, Insightful)

aztektum (170569) | more than 7 years ago | (#16402359)

IANAL...

If I were Take Two, my FIRST piece of evidence in defending my wares would be America's Army. "Hey it isn't just us making games that are violent. The very same government asked to pass judgement against us gives this shit away!"

AA is designed to be as accurate as possible with regard to teaching people proper technique for assault, infiltration and causing strategic mayhem. All supported by our tax dollars. If the government is freely supplying this material to people, how the fuck can they ban it? Is this fucking insane or am I missing something?

Re:Defense Exhibit A: America's Army (3, Funny)

Broken scope (973885) | more than 7 years ago | (#16402573)

Yes, run into a building without checking, running down the middle of the street, and shooting everything that moves is teaching me how to use military tactics.

Re:Defense Exhibit A: America's Army (2, Insightful)

FusionDragon2099 (799857) | more than 7 years ago | (#16402639)

It'll be a double-edged sword; America's Army can be used as evidence that videogames train people to be violent, because that's what the military uses it for.

Re:Defense Exhibit A: America's Army (1, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#16402725)

Now if we could only get our soldiers to stop jumping into walls, and maybe train them to not scream over "spawn camping f4g0t wall hax"

What's up with Jack Thompson ? (1)

The Sith Lord (111494) | more than 7 years ago | (#16402365)

... he hasn't been the same after playing a US general in Broken Arrow (worst accent EVER !)

Whose the 'public nuisance'? (2, Funny)

suedehed (21718) | more than 7 years ago | (#16402377)

Can they counter sue to have Jack Thompson labelled a 'public nuisance'?

Jack still has license to practice law? (2, Funny)

Sj0 (472011) | more than 7 years ago | (#16402399)

Why does this guy still have the license to practice law? He should have been disbarred years ago for the stunts he's always trying to pull.

Hell, why is this guy still alive? After what he said about the gamefaqs community, he should have been struck down by God as an agent of the devil.

Re:Jack still has license to practice law? (4, Insightful)

geekoid (135745) | more than 7 years ago | (#16402533)

If Jack Thompson was right, he'd be dead.

Re:Jack still has license to practice law? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#16402619)

Probably for the same reason that Bill & Hill weren't disbarred. Him a perjurer and her not being able to "find" the billing records. Lawyers, like police, are crooks for the most part.

Re:Jack still has license to practice law? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#16402745)

Uh, Bill was disbarred.

Bewareness (2, Funny)

afz902k (1000622) | more than 7 years ago | (#16402409)

Bully is a game that no children should be exposed to. Clearly, It has been crafted by the Devil it/him/her-self, or probably a lesser Demon such as Orobas or Teeraal, to make the children who play it commit acts of violence against other children, and those who don't, against Jack Thompson and his lackeys.

Re:Bewareness (1)

Quiet_Desperation (858215) | more than 7 years ago | (#16402513)

I dunno. I thought Hell was still using COBOL. Can they even code something like this?

Judge doesn't get it? (4, Insightful)

Facekhan (445017) | more than 7 years ago | (#16402433)

Since when can some random uninvolved third party with no standing sue to see an unreleased product? Is the judge JT's drinking buddy or just completely out of his mind?

This story makes *SO* much sense here! (1)

soren42 (700305) | more than 7 years ago | (#16402435)


So, before I RTFA, I just assumed that there was a "bully" that was to be handed over.

"News for Nerds," eh? A bully getting there just desserts would certainly be of interest to all us nerds who faced bullies throughout adolesence.

But, then, I suppose that after RTFA, the real bully here is that idiot Jack Thompson.

Seriously (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#16402439)

Never played GTA. Thought about it, but never did.

Now I'm getting curious. Might have to pick me up a copy.

Re:Seriously (1)

Quiet_Desperation (858215) | more than 7 years ago | (#16402489)

Now I'm getting curious. Might have to pick me up a copy.

It should be in the $20 "greatest hits" bin by now. It's a decent game, but it also doubles as a fun toy. You can just wander around the world and do things. It was the most immersive game I ever played until Oblivion came along.

Re:Seriously (1)

Babbster (107076) | more than 7 years ago | (#16403009)

If you're going to pick one up for a first play, I'd suggest going with Vice City ($20 new for PC/PS2/Xbox). I think it's the best of the lot so far, and the 80s vibe is a blast. :)

Volunteers? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#16402455)

Anyone want to give Jack Thompson a sightseeing tour of NYC in their Cirrus SR20?

Does anyone have a mirror yet.. (1)

Acecoolco (1012419) | more than 7 years ago | (#16402487)

Does anyone have a mirror yet.. 1..2..3..4..5..6..7..8..9..10 seconds yet?

How soon before... (2, Funny)

Boap (559344) | more than 7 years ago | (#16402497)

Jack Thompson is declared "public nuisance"?

Some Background (4, Informative)

cgenman (325138) | more than 7 years ago | (#16402505)

Some Background
Thompson's rambling initial letter [bit-tech.net] .
The Suit [residentgamer.com] , from Jack's Perspective.
Ars Technica [arstechnica.com] 's take on what happened today.
A little bit about Jack [wikipedia.org] (including favorite classics like "claims Janet Reno is a homosexual. Repeatedly." and "tries to get Florida bar ruled unconstitutional.")

Sooo... Take 2 has deep into Thursday to file an appeal. Thompson will likely retort on Friday, and a ruling made on Monday. 24 hours after this Take 2 will deliver a copy... on the release day.

As the site is currently down, does anyone know what the legal grounds are for this ruling? How can there be "more copycat violence" if the game hasn't been released in the first place?

For that matter, I'd like to demand a pre-release copy of Halo 3 to ensure that there isn't graphic violence and amazing multiplayer action.

More lawyers than engineers (again)... (1)

gorehog (534288) | more than 7 years ago | (#16402521)

See the problem here is that America has more lawyers than engineers. If Jack Thompson and crew were engineers then they would write non-violent video games like civ and carmen sandiego, and more recently things like Katamari, or Mario.

Instead, all he can think to do is sue people for doing something he does not like. His is the violent and destructive action against a creative endeavor. The fact that the court is willing to indulge his infantile rampaging is indicitive of the corruption and facist tendencies of the legal profession and courts of Florida. Hillary Clinton is no damn better on this issue.

The fact that car jacking and personal violence predates videogaming altogether wont stop these pricks from scapegoating the new pastime any more than it stopped them from blaming TV, movies, liberal hollywood, Rock and Roll, guns, fluoride in the water, alchohol, and communism.

To a certain type of scared closed minded mentality the new thing is always to blame. To them it's not a matter of "how does this work" but rather "how can this hurt me." And when you look at the numbers of lawyers to engineers you start to see the trend of people more willing be fearful than knowledgeable.

Re:More lawyers than engineers (again)... (1)

PieSquared (867490) | more than 7 years ago | (#16402609)

You made me think of something (don't you hate that?).

GTA isn't original. They didn't come up with the concept of shooting a hooker or stealing a car. They copied these things from the real world (where, believe it or not these things have at some point happened). I've seen these things on the news, so I know they happen. Moreover, I could get the idea that I should do such things in the real world by watching the news! Did anyone check if the various shooters blamed on GTA watched the news before they did what they did?

The News should clearly be against the law, as it promotes violence and even teaches people how to kill (I've seen people use a gun on the news!). Too bad that wouldn't get any publicity if Jack tried to sue them (or at least it would be very different publicity, probably starting with "crackpot theory").

Re:More lawyers than engineers (again)... (1)

east coast (590680) | more than 7 years ago | (#16402713)

they would write non-violent video games like civ

Civ is non-violent? Granted, it's not graphic but Civ does NOT teach non-violence or tolerence.

Prime example: A couple of weeks before Civ IV hit the shelves I loaded up Civ III for old times sake. I played on a huge map with 6-7 other civs and lead a fairly peaceful existence, only two minor wars. I never lost a city and only took over 3-4, one from warfare the others from influence. I was the largest civ, the most advanced civ and the most peaceful civ (AFAIK, I never provoked the wars I was in). I gave tons of tech to my neighbors and traded with them on a regular basis. My rating was "East the Weak". Fantastic!

Basically after that I realized that "civilization" should really be called "kick the auslanders asses". When it comes down to it the game is difficult and tedious, at best, after you establish yourself unless you're willing to go to war. If you don't go to war it's endless bantering with the idiotic AI demanding stuff from you for free lest you be blown to bits. If you somehow manage to get through all of it without either being a prick or a victim you get rated as weak? WTF?

Compare that to the numerous times that I've played CS:S and rescued all the hostages without firing a shot... I was still rewarded for my efforts a hell of a lot better than what Civ rewarded me for being generous, peaceful and noble.

None of this is to say I disagree with the rest of your post.

I'm SO sick of this! (1)

thombone69 (771957) | more than 7 years ago | (#16402545)

People do not have to buy the damn thing if it offends them. I am so sick of fascists like Jack(ass) Thompson trying to force people to live by his moral code.

How much? (1, Interesting)

atomicstrawberry (955148) | more than 7 years ago | (#16402575)

So, how much are Take Two paying Jack Thompson at the moment in order to get him to stir up shit to drum up their sales figures? The whole thing seems kind of suspicious to me. It certainly wouldn't be the first time someone's been paid off to act as an 'enemy' of another person in order to help drum up support and interest...

Re:How much? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#16402743)

Mod parent up. I was going to post along the same lines.

Thompson must not realize that he's actually the industry posterboy. I would say that you can't buy this kind of publicity, but who knows... maybe they actually are paying him to stir up interest. There is no such thing as bad publicity. This is doubly true for violent games; surely Jack knows that.

My alternate theory is that maybe he's also planning to run for office, so he wants to get his name associated with a hot topic for the next generation. In 10 years they'll forget he was the "bad guy" and vote for him because they remember his name.

Re:How much? (1)

Jarjarthejedi (996957) | more than 7 years ago | (#16402869)

*cough cough* Shortpacked did something like that *cough cough* Linky -> http://www.shortpacked.com/d/20051026.html [shortpacked.com] , read back 1 comic and forward I think 2 comics to get the full story...quite funny. PS: Shortpacked is a webcomic, it's about a toy store...a very odd toy store.

Kind of a sneaky way (3, Funny)

BeeBeard (999187) | more than 7 years ago | (#16402615)

to avoid paying for a game. You'd think the judge could afford to just buy it when it comes out.

Re:Kind of a sneaky way (2, Funny)

Dachannien (617929) | more than 7 years ago | (#16402709)

No kidding. The rest of us mere mortals have to wait until 0-day to pick up our free copies.

Thanks, Jack!! (3, Insightful)

eepok (545733) | more than 7 years ago | (#16402663)

I would never have heard of this game had not Jack Thompson thrown up such a huff. Now, I want to play it.

"Let's see... we'll just ban these books and NO ONE will ever want to read them... right?"

Actually...he can't appeal this (5, Insightful)

bigskank (748551) | more than 7 years ago | (#16402681)

This is an interlocutory order. TakeTwo can't appeal this order forcing them to turn over the game. If TakeTwo loses the full trial, then they can appeal and claim that the order should have never been issued. It's a civil proceudure rule.

That aside, I'm not surprised. Most state judges have little concept of the first amendment. Even if they lose at the trial level, they will almost certainly prevail on appeal. Video games are protected as expression just like speech, books, and flag burning. All this will do is stir up a media shitstorm, you'll see a bunch of Tipper Gore wannabes out whining about "saving the children," from violence, and then we'll go back to executing criminals, engaging in war, and watching Sunday afternoon football. God Bless America.

How about a video games based on... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#16402685)

the incredibly violent and bloody confrontations that are in the Bible? Hmmmm.

And then some sex games like: seduce your dad to get pregnant?

What do all of you think? Think it will cool the heels of these asshats?

Frankly, I think video games are idiotic bullshit (1)

Ralph Spoilsport (673134) | more than 7 years ago | (#16402787)

and a bad habit best broken early.

HOWEVER I will cheerfully defend the rights of others to play them. It is imperative that the free thinking among us stand up against this rising tide of intolerance and cluelessness.

This election is 1858 all over again... Stand up against the theocracy. Stand up for your rights!

RS

Who's really to blame? (2, Insightful)

Private.Tucker (843252) | more than 7 years ago | (#16402849)

Funny how Jack's tried in the past over a school-shooting to get $33-mil for damages because the kid who did the shooting played "Violent" video games such as Final Fantasy, had a copy of The Basketball Diaries, and accessed porn sites. Parents no where to be found? I'm rather sick of this guy.

Where were the parents when these kids get the games, obtains movies, and accesses the porn sites? Jacky-boy. Put the blame where it is due. I have no problems with my kid and porn or video games because I monitor what he does on the computer, consoles, and DVD-player, and I'll be damned if some born-again Christian thinks he can control how I control my kid.

Some kid shoots people and you try to get the kids parents $33-million? Idiot...

I think it's a good idea... (1)

Shemmie (909181) | more than 7 years ago | (#16402941)

... finally, I way to get my hands on Duke Nukem Forever! "Yes Mr Judge, the game will probably make me do bad things - can I just have a sneak preview to be sure?"

It's about bad parents... (1)

tansey (238786) | more than 7 years ago | (#16403013)

[quote]a judge in Miami ruled that Take Two Interactive, makers of the controversial title Bully, must hand over a copy of the soon to be released game to the court within 24 hours[/quote]

Or else the judge will have to admit he forgot his son's birthday and didn't get him anything.
Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>