gamepolitics: Punxsutawney Phil Sees.... Another Take Two Lawsuit

Game Politics (

gamepolitics) wrote,
@ 2006-02-02 17:16:00

Entry tags:

gta, hot coffee, lawsuit class-action, take two

Punxsutawney Phil Sees.... Another Take Two Lawsuit

A press release issued today by the Hartford, CT law firm Schatz & Nobel outlines plans for a stockholder suit against Take Two. Qualifying members of the plaintiff class are those who purchased Take Two common stock between October 25, 2004 (GTA San Andreas release date) and January 27th of this year.

The complaint essentially alleges that Take Two's mismanagement of the GTA franchise and the Hot Coffee scandal caused the stock price to drop significantly, thereby harming investors.

Despite being filed in the Southern District of New York, this is not the St. Clair Shore General Employees Retirement System case mentioned earlier this week by GamePolitics in our report on Take Two's SEC filing.

Oddly enough, Schatz & Nobel seem to be hunting for a lead plaintiff. Their press release reads, in part: "If you are a member of the class, you may... request that the Court appoint you as lead plaintiff... a class member that acts on behalf of other class members in directing the litigation... lead plaintiffs make important decisions which could affect the overall recovery for class members, including decisions concerning settlement."

GP: Hey, since he bought a share of Take Two stock in order to crash the upcoming shareholders' meeting, maybe Jack Thompson could be the lead plaintiff. What a three-ring circus that would be!!

Many thanks to Jabrwock for digging up this story...

(Post a new comment)

	I thought... automancer 2006-02-02 10:30 pm UTC (link)
	Punxatawney Phil just saw his shadow. Oh well, six more weeks of winter. I just hope it's the same winter that we have been getting in Kansas so far. It's about 60 out today. I wouldn't mind six more weeks of 60 degree weather. -Auto (Reply to this) (Thread)

	Re: I thought... jabrwock 2006-02-02 10:32 pm UTC (link)
	Really? Because up here, all 3 of our groundhogs missed theirs, so they expect an early spring. :P http://www.cbc.ca/story/canada/national/2006/02/02/groundhog-060202.html (Reply to this) (Parent)(Thread)

	Re: I thought... wxdiva 2006-02-02 10:50 pm UTC (link)
	Seems like we're going to get an early spring, too. It's been raining almost all day. (Reply to this) (Parent)

	Re: I thought... tabor_tooth 2006-02-03 01:20 am UTC (link)
	Agreed. I can deal with this nice weather we've been having here in the capitol city. (Reply to this) (Parent)

	jabrwock 2006-02-02 10:33 pm UTC (link)
	Hey, maybe Jack Thompson could be the lead plaintiff. What athree-ring circus that would be!! Lol, I'd pay to see that. (Reply to this) (Thread)

	wxdiva 2006-02-02 10:51 pm UTC (link)
	I don't think it would last. He'd probably be thrown out of the case, not like he isn't used to it. (Reply to this) (Parent)(Thread)

	leyviur 2006-02-03 04:06 pm UTC (link)
	Ain't that the truth... (Reply to this) (Parent)

Deja vu?

jabrwock
2006-02-02 10:37 pm UTC (link)

http://www.primezone.com/newsroom/news.html?d=93420

NASHVILLE, Tenn., Feb. 2, 2006 (PRIMEZONE) -- Barrett, Johnston & Parsley today announced that a class action lawsuit has been commenced in the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York on behalf of purchasers of Take-Two Interactive Software, Inc. ("Take-Two" or "the Company") (Nasdaq:TTWO) common stock during the period between October 25, 2004 and January 27, 2006 (the "Class Period").

If you wish to serve as lead plaintiff, you must move the Court no later than 60 days from February 1, 2006. If you wish to discuss this action or have any questions concerning this notice or your rights or interests or would like to obtain a copy of the Complaint, please contact plaintiff's counsel, Timothy L. Miles at 615/244-2202 or via e-mail at tmiles@barrettjohnston.com. Any member of the purported class may move the Court to serve as lead plaintiff through counsel of their choice, or may choose to do nothing and remain an absent class member.

Sounds to me like various law firms are fishing for clients. And they all seem to be using the roughly the same press release.

(Reply to this) (Thread)

More Deja vu!

jabrwock
2006-02-02 10:41 pm UTC (link)

NEW YORK--(BUSINESS WIRE)--Feb. 1, 2006--Lerach Coughlin Stoia Geller Rudman & Robbins LLP ("Lerach Coughlin") (http://www.lerachlaw.com/cases/taketwointeractive/) (Due to the length of this URL, it may be necessary to copy and paste this hyperlink into your Internet browser's URL address field.) today announced that a class action lawsuit has been commenced in the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York on behalf of purchasers of Take-Two Interactive Software, Inc. ("Take-Two" or "the Company") (NASDAQ: TTWO) common stock during the period between October 25, 2004 and January 27, 2006 (the "Class Period").

If you wish to serve as lead plaintiff, you must move the Court no later than 60 days from today. If you wish to discuss this action or have any questions concerning this notice or your rights or interests, please contact plaintiff's counsel, Samuel H. Rudman or David A. Rosenfeld of Lerach Coughlin at 800/449-4900 or 619/231-1058 or via e-mail at wsl@lerachlaw.com. If you are a member of this class, you can view a copy of the complaint as filed or join this class action online at http://www.lerachlaw.com/cases/taketwointeractive/. Any member of the purported class may move the Court to serve as lead plaintiff through counsel of their choice, or may choose to do nothing and remain an absent class member.

http://home.businesswire.com/portal/site/google/index.jsp?ndmViewId=news_view&newsId=20060201006261&newsLang=en

(Reply to this) (Parent)

	dogpile on Take Two... gamepolitics 2006-02-02 10:59 pm UTC (link)
	...the sharks smell blood in the water. (Reply to this) (Parent)(Thread)

	Re: dogpile on Take Two... jdmdsp911 2006-02-02 11:14 pm UTC (link)
	Isn't that type of "fishing" illegal? (Reply to this) (Parent)(Thread)

Re: dogpile on Take Two...

kildorn
2006-02-02 11:48 pm UTC (link)

Depends on the state. Many have started adopting protection laws against class action fishing. Some haven't. (I forget where, but one specific district used to pretty much base it's economy around being a great place to sue corperations from.)

Anyways, this is serious fishing, as clients haven't stood up and said "WE ARE SUING", it's lawyers trying to stir up a class action, since in those cases the law firm walks away with more money than all the clients.

(Reply to this) (Parent)

	Re: Deja vu? amisplacedphile 2006-02-03 04:24 pm UTC (link)
	I relate that to ambulance chasing. This is why lawyers are looked down upon - "I've got a great idea for people to sue! WHO'S WITH ME!?" No basis other then them searching for a high-paycheck. Today is - slap-a-lawyer day. (Reply to this) (Parent)

	No, No, No. mrpat___ 2006-02-02 10:39 pm UTC (link)
	Dennis, please don't give Jack the idea to come to Connecticut. I don't want that lunatic in my state. (Reply to this) (Thread)

	Re: No, No, No. gamepolitics 2006-02-02 11:00 pm UTC (link)
	LOL... But the case is being heard in NY (Reply to this) (Parent)(Thread)

	Re: No, No, No. mrpat___ 2006-02-02 11:13 pm UTC (link)
	bah, It figures; the one time I don't read the article and I get called out on it :P Thanks for replying though, Dennis :) (Reply to this) (Parent)

	There must be something in New York State jabrwock 2006-02-02 10:45 pm UTC (link)
	There must be something in the security laws there, because there are now 3 nearly identical class action lawsuits there, all seeking a lead plaintiff... (Reply to this)

A few noteworthy points:

andrew_eisen
2006-02-02 10:54 pm UTC (link)

Specifically, defendants failed to disclose that Take-Two improperly hid pornographic materials directly in the programming of the Grand Theft Auto: San Andreas in order to obtain a rating of "Mature 17+" by the powerful Entertainment Software Rating Board ("ESRB").

At the time, Take-Two was under no obligation to disclose the presence of the Hot Coffee scenes. Content that is not part of the game was not defined as pertinent until later. Also, the “improperly hid[den]” material is not, by even the loosest definition of the word, pornographic.

As alleged in the Complaint, had the ESRB known of the pornographic materials contained in the game, it would have assigned it a rating of "Adults Only 18+"...

That’s speculation that I do not agree with. As it stands, copies of the game with the Hot Coffee content are mis-rated at AO.

Andrew Eisen

(Reply to this) (Thread)

	Re: A few noteworthy points: gray17 2006-02-02 11:10 pm UTC (link)
	I think the idea with the comments about "improperly hid" isn't that they failed to properly remove the code, but a claim that they hid the scene from the ESRB to get the rating they wanted, while intending for gamers to locate it. Basically an accusation that Take-Two deliberately deceived the rating board, not just failed to mention something. (Reply to this) (Parent)(Thread)

	Re: There must be something in New York State enmitywithin 2006-02-02 11:36 pm UTC (link)
	well, stupidity is prevalent here. since you have to download a patch to see it. they weren't decieving at all, because if you play it normally and legitamately, you can never see it, nor is it in the official players guide. (Reply to this) (Parent)

Re: A few noteworthy points:

pyrrhus9588
2006-02-03 05:16 am UTC (link)

That’s speculation that I do not agree with. As it stands, copies of the game with the Hot Coffee content are mis-rated at AO.

Definitely, when M-rated games such as Lesiure Suit Larry: Magna Cum Laude and Playboy The Mansion have topless nudity in addition to the dry humping. Had the content been left in the game ("Hot Coffee" v1) I think that it still would have only been rated M as it should be covered under the "Strong Sexual Content" descriptor.

The nudity was a result of "Hot Coffee" v2 which modifies the textures.

(Reply to this) (Parent)(Thread)

Re: A few noteworthy points:

kildorn
2006-02-03 02:14 pm UTC (link)

Pretty much. But you have to use a technical jury that knows what texturing is.

In the simple mod to enable content, the scene was using ingame textures for everything except the nude parts. Those were untextured, showing that the nudity was not there in full, and T2/R* should not be held liable more than EA over sims nudity patches, or Lara Croft nude patches, or anything else which involves a third party editing or replacing texture files to add pornographic material.

Anyone can modify textures, the same way I can spraypaint a naked female on the side of my car. It doesn't mean Toyota was peddling pornography by selling me the car however, as it's an after factory modification.

(Reply to this) (Parent)

	Holy plaigerism Batman! jabrwock 2006-02-02 11:09 pm UTC (link)
	Read the "complaint" section, and it's IDENTICAL between "Lerach Coughlin" & "Barrett, Johnston & Parsley" suits... word for word! They were released 2 1/2 hours apart... crazy... (Reply to this) (Thread)

	Re: Holy plaigerism Batman! enmitywithin 2006-02-02 11:33 pm UTC (link)
	what? your surprised? doesn't surprise me that these lawyers wouldn't be original. they all see T2 as a scapegoat to steal money from. and that's what they are doing. (Reply to this) (Parent)(Thread)

	Re: Holy plaigerism Batman! jabrwock 2006-02-03 02:41 pm UTC (link)
	what? your surprised? doesn't surprise me that these lawyers wouldn't be original. I figured they'd copy each other's ideas for a lawsuit. But to copy and paste from another firms' lawsuit? It litterally is word for word, I even had the computer check it. Same spacing, punctuation, etc. I mean I knew some lawyers were lazy... (Reply to this) (Parent)

	darkmane 2006-02-02 11:10 pm UTC (link)
	I love the idea of Thompson being the lead plaintiff. 1) It would quickly lead to a gag order about the case 2) There are no good comedies on TV right now, I could use a good laugh. (Reply to this)

Ahead of its time.

nintendite
2006-02-03 12:09 am UTC (link)

Simple fact: Take 2 is ahead of its time.

Now, don't get me wrong, I don't care for the company or its games. I don't own a single R* or T2 game and I have no desire to.

However, like it or not in another 10 or less years there are going to be plenty of companies just like it (whether it succeeds or fails) pumping out hundreds of the same kind of games. It is obviously what people want, and we have seen this same phenomena with the movie industry already (before they fell on their face due to lack of new ideas).

T2 is simply ahead of its time, and it is currently being "hung on the cross" (if you would) so that the Grandtheftians will have something to worship for years to come. This isn't going to go away even if T2 does die and is sealed behind a big rock. It is only going to get much worse.

(Reply to this)

	jerico6 2006-02-03 12:42 am UTC (link)
	Punxsutawney Phil Sees.... Another Take Two Lawsuit PHIL FROM GROUNDHOG DAY! (Reply to this) (Thread)

	chrisswiss83 2006-02-03 01:02 am UTC (link)
	It is Groundhog Day after all. (Reply to this) (Parent)

	For once glad Bush has been nominating judges: tollwutig 2006-02-03 01:05 am UTC (link)
	Since the type of judges Bush appoints aren't the type to let frivolous lawsuits stand, and pretty sure this type of class has to go to federal court. (Reply to this)

	tyrillpaladin 2006-02-04 08:22 pm UTC (link)
	And then when Jack-o sabotages the case with his insane rantings and unfounded fear mongering, the stockholders can sue HIM for damages too! (Reply to this)

Username:		Create an Account Forgot your login or password? Login w/ OpenID
Password:
	Remember Me
	English • Español • Deutsch • Русский…

About

Help

Get Involved

Legal

Store

LJ Labs