Game Politics ([info]gamepolitics) wrote,
@ 2006-08-16 17:17:00
Previous Entry  Add to memories!  Tell a Friend!  Next Entry
Entry tags:bully, florida, jack thompson, lawsuits, take-two, wal-mart

Jack Thompson Files Suit To Stop Bully, Claims Victory

Like many gamers, controversial Miami attorney Jack Thompson is hoping for a sneak peek at Bully.

Thompson's interest in the much-discussed game however, is hardly that of a fan.

In a lengthy, rambling suit filed earlier today with the Miami-Dade Circuit Court, Thompson has demanded that publisher Take-Two Interactive supply him with a copy of Bully "so that its content can be fairly assessed by someone, prior to its commercial release, other than a) a hand-picked member of the media and b) the ESRB with its history of, at best, ineptitude in analyzing the content of Take-Two products... If Bully is indeed safe for children's play, then petitioner (Thompson) will be the first to say so."

The request that a game publisher supply a multi-million dollar development project to an outside source for evaluation is unprecedented, and is certain be turned down, if not ignored completely. Attorneys for Take-Two will no doubt move for a dismissal of Thompson's suit.

As he has in the past, Thompson based his latest Bully suit on a Florida law relating to public nuisances. In this case, however, the "nuisance" is "that Bully will lead to increased bullying in our schools... Marketing and selling a school bullying virtual reality simulator to school children... is preparing at-risk students here and elsewhere for another Columbine."

In addition to Take-Two, Thompson's suit names major retailer Wal-Mart. As GP types this, Thompson is circulating an e-mail claiming a "Huge Initial Victory: Wal-Mart Stops Selling Bully."

Indeed, Bully does not currently appear at Wal-mart.com. It's unclear why at this point. Previously, the site had been taking pre-release orders. Absent an announcement from the giant retailer, however, Thompson's victory lap seems more than a little premature.

GP readers can download the Miami attorney's complaint here in MS Word format.




Page 1 of 3
<<[1] [2] [3] >>

(Post a new comment)


[info]carmine
2006-08-16 10:33 pm UTC (link)
Sure, because banning a game from one store (in this case, WalMart) is SO going to make people NOT want to buy it from other stores.

(Reply to this) (Thread)


[info]eusisnaphtali
2006-08-16 10:57 pm UTC (link)
To be fair, Wal-Mart kinda made up a good quarter of all US game sales last I checked.

(Reply to this) (Parent)(Thread)

(no subject) - [info]jabrwock, 2006-08-16 11:13 pm UTC
(no subject) - [info]spartan_sword, 2006-08-16 11:07 pm UTC
(no subject) - [info]nightwng2000, 2006-08-16 11:23 pm UTC

[info]kajex
2006-08-16 10:33 pm UTC (link)
I'm not sure opinions are really needed in a complaint. "How Appropriate" and all that jazz.

I like how he totally witheld the fact that numerous studies show no actual solid link between GTA and violence. This seems like one of those things that people are going to ignore. If he wants a copy, he can buy it himself when it is released.

(Reply to this) (Thread)


[info]loopychew
2006-08-17 08:03 am UTC (link)
What are you talking about? He's got hundreds, thousands, BILLIONS of studies showing a causal link between GTA and violence! A CAUSAL LINK!

(Reply to this) (Parent)


[info]ferior
2006-08-16 10:34 pm UTC (link)
... WHAT?!

Oh, gods, I think he has truly lost it this time. What makes him think he has the right to play a video game before anyone else? Because he's a lawyer? Because he's an upright citizen?

Because he's Jack Thompson?

(Reply to this) (Thread)


[info]father_time89
2006-08-16 11:59 pm UTC (link)
Because he's Jack Thompson?

Yup and as the most succsessful lawyer of all time and someone with absolutely no bias whatsoever in terms of video-games or Take-two games Jack Thompson should be the one that decides whether or not it is ok for children.

(Reply to this) (Parent)

Expect Counter Suit By take two
[info]yukimurasanada
2006-08-16 10:37 pm UTC (link)
As a general rule, what jack has done is not suprising, but what he forgets is it's not the first time someone tried this.

The ptc years ago attempted the same thing with the WWF, and the WWF sued them for over 3.5 million. If take two is smart, they will do the same, as what thompson is doing is clearly slander and interferance with Take Two bussiness relationships,which the court ruled in the WWF case, was against the law.

This is why the ESA should have slapped JT with a slander suit years ago, had they done so, they could have at least put him out of action finacially. As much as I stand for the first amendment, there are times when certina measures must be taken.

Hopefully the Esa of Take Two, which recently got a new, major stock holder, will counter this idiot now that he's crossed the line.

(Reply to this) (Thread)

Re: Expect Counter Suit By take two
[info]father_time89
2006-08-17 12:00 am UTC (link)
hey do you have a wikipedia link or something regarding the ptc vs. wwf case?

(Reply to this) (Parent)(Thread)

Re: Expect Counter Suit By take two - [info]curiousthompson, 2006-08-17 01:43 am UTC
Re: Expect Counter Suit By take two - [info]zippydsmlee, 2006-08-17 07:24 pm UTC
Re: Expect Counter Suit By take two - [info]father_time89, 2006-08-18 01:41 am UTC

[info]darkmane
2006-08-16 10:39 pm UTC (link)
I would actually almost support this, if I thought JT were a fair an unbiased source.

However since he's spent however many years publicly decrying the video game industry, trying to get anti-video game legislation passed and basically making it his crusade to shut down mature video games, I can't think he's an unbiased source.

(Reply to this)


[info]kilika_stryfe
2006-08-16 10:39 pm UTC (link)
If that's the case, then I demand to get a chance to "evaluate" Halo 3

(Reply to this) (Thread)


[info]dan888
2006-08-16 11:04 pm UTC (link)
I demand to get a chance to "evaluate" zelda TP then

(Reply to this) (Parent)(Thread)

(no subject) - [info]father_time89, 2006-08-17 12:02 am UTC
(no subject) - [info]curiousthompson, 2006-08-17 01:45 am UTC
(no subject) - [info]terminator44, 2006-08-17 03:25 am UTC
(no subject) - [info]bishop186, 2006-08-17 10:56 pm UTC
(no subject) - [info]lordlundar, 2006-08-17 04:38 am UTC
(no subject) - [info]blackmesaman, 2006-08-17 12:54 pm UTC

[info]aresef
2006-08-16 10:40 pm UTC (link)
"If Bully is indeed safe for children's play, then petitioner (Thompson) will be the first to say so."

Excuse me for a moment...

HAHAHA! This is hilarious. Thompson is actively trying to make himself look like a holier-than-thou prick. Of course, we knew all along, but now he's making sure the judicial knows damn well he's out of his mind.

(Reply to this)


[info]larpguide
2006-08-16 10:42 pm UTC (link)
I wonder - is there anyone out there who is as vocal as JT is that is on our side? I mean, all I ever hear about is his interviews, works, etc. and he seems to be fed small fish who don't know how to respond well to him.

The pre-release request is a bit comical but he can use any rejection as ammo - just like he's using Walmart.

(Reply to this) (Thread)


[info]aresef
2006-08-16 11:03 pm UTC (link)
"I wonder - is there anyone out there who is as vocal as JT is that is on our side?"

You answered your own question. People who actually have to listen to what Jacko is spewing (i.e.: judges) are actually persuaded the other way. By being himself, he's being the biggest help to our side.

(Reply to this) (Parent)(Thread)

I disagree - [info]larpguide, 2006-08-17 12:01 am UTC
Re: I disagree - [info]aresef, 2006-08-17 12:08 am UTC
Re: I disagree - [info]thefremen, 2006-08-17 05:13 pm UTC
Re: I disagree - [info]zippydsmlee, 2006-08-17 07:29 pm UTC

[info]xlorep_darkhelm
2006-08-16 10:47 pm UTC (link)
Indeed, Bully does not currently appear at Wal-mart.com. It's unclear why at this point.


Totally baffled here myself. I mean... why wouldn't they have Bully on the shelves now?

/sarcasm

(Reply to this) (Thread)


[info]gamepolitics
2006-08-16 11:00 pm UTC (link)
apparently they were pre-selling on the site.

I hardly see this as the victory Thompson claims, absent any announcement from Wal-Mart.

It's possible they received the suit and took it down while they digest what's going on.

(Reply to this) (Parent)(Thread)

(no subject) - [info]jabrwock, 2006-08-16 11:11 pm UTC
(no subject) - [info]gamepolitics, 2006-08-16 11:17 pm UTC
(no subject) - [info]jabrwock, 2006-08-16 11:22 pm UTC
(no subject) - [info]traiklin, 2006-08-17 12:32 am UTC
(no subject) - [info]lordlundar, 2006-08-17 04:42 am UTC
The other possible reason... - [info]acroamatis, 2006-08-17 01:30 pm UTC
Re: The other possible reason... - [info]jabrwock, 2006-08-17 05:13 pm UTC
Re: The other possible reason... - [info]thefremen, 2006-08-17 05:15 pm UTC
Re: The other possible reason... - [info]gamepolitics, 2006-08-17 05:52 pm UTC
Re: The other possible reason... - [info]thefremen, 2006-08-17 06:52 pm UTC
(no subject) - [info]barfo, 2006-08-16 11:39 pm UTC

[info]eusisnaphtali
2006-08-16 10:58 pm UTC (link)
Yet more Wacko Jacko antics. I'll be surprised if he actually delays the release. And Wal-Mart's probably just playing it safe for now and waiting to see how this all goes. That, or easy as hell to intimidate, but I think I wouldn't be seeing SA at their stores then.

(Reply to this) (Thread)


[info]leyviur
2006-08-17 09:26 am UTC (link)
I doubt the biggest cutthroat chaistore has anything to fear from a useless old kook.

(Reply to this) (Parent)

Finally...
[info]_rit
2006-08-16 11:01 pm UTC (link)
Finally, Jack's master plan is revealed. All these years, he's been working up to excuses to get and play pre-release copies of games. All because Activision turned down his job application for a QA/Tester position years ago.

Seriously though, where does Jack see the role of parental responsibility in all of this? I'm not a parent, but I have enough friends with young kids to know that it's a PARENT's job to decide what their children should be viewing.... Not Jack Thompsons.

And I fail to see how "push x repeatedly to dunk Billy's head in the toilet" translates to real world swirlie skills: or is Jack claiming that Bully teaches kids about things that they NEVER Would have been exposed to before ?

(Reply to this) (Thread)

Re: Finally...
[info]_rit
2006-08-16 11:07 pm UTC (link)
Oh, and the MPAA is paid for and operated by the film industry.

Yet Jack isn't complaining here...

(Reply to this) (Parent)(Thread)

Re: Finally... - [info]jabrwock, 2006-08-16 11:14 pm UTC
Re: Finally... - [info]jabrwock, 2006-08-16 11:17 pm UTC
Re: Finally... - [info]lordlundar, 2006-08-17 04:43 am UTC
Re: Finally... - [info]xwaix, 2006-08-17 01:44 am UTC
Ah, bullying at it's best
[info]jabrwock
2006-08-16 11:01 pm UTC (link)
What better way to demonstrate that bullying is a problem than by bullying a corporation with threats of lawsuits. The irony is killing me...

Although I can't see Walmart responding to JT's threats. They certainly haven't before, despite his previous lawsuits. I can't see them doing so now...

Besides, are they going to refund everyone's money who pre-ordered? HA!

On another note, in their defense Take Two should submit JT's emails stating that he wants to prevent it's release at all costs, in any form, so therefore it's impossible for him to be unbiased with regards to whether the game is "safe" or not. So providing him with an advanced copy would be pointless.

(Reply to this) (Thread)

Re: Ah, bullying at it's best
[info]father_time89
2006-08-17 12:09 am UTC (link)
You know what I bet Take-two could send JT a disc with a bully logog on there put anything on there and JT would automaticcaly dismiss it as inappropiate for children, that would mean that Rockstar can have a Bully-branded disc put tetris and pac-man on it and watch as JT makes all these ridiculous claims about Bully then finally tell everyone what JT ahs really been doing.

(Reply to this) (Parent)(Thread)

Re: Ah, bullying at it's best - [info]lordlundar, 2006-08-17 04:44 am UTC
So he's still barking out orders...
[info]cecil475
2006-08-16 11:03 pm UTC (link)
And still thinking that he will always get his way. Which if he did and they'd give him a copy he would say it wasn't safe and trash it anyway, and then find a way to claim it a form of harassment. I don't have kids. No not one. But if I did I would not need that douchebag's seal of approvial for what media I let my child see and hear. Thompson is going to fall flat on his face again. The game is going to go through the normal ESRB testing cycle then it will be sold. Thompson will be ignored. And he will lose the suit unless he decides to drop it. The only thing Thompson and his buddies were really doing as far as bully is concerned is free publicity. 'Course the antigamers wouldn't know anything about that. Bitch,whine,moan about a game and then wonder why its so popular.

Ohhhh! Like Wal-Mart not carrying Bully is like y'know like, such a blow. I don't think it's something like, I can y'know get over......y'know...?
Especially since I buy a large majority of my games at either EBGames or Gamestop. There is very little I buy at Wal-Mart that's entertainment. I also HIGHLY doubt that Thompson had anything to do with it.

Nice try Thompson, But no cookie.

- Warren Lewis

(Reply to this)

Oh, for crying out loud!
[info]blackmanta
2006-08-16 11:05 pm UTC (link)
And here I thought he was just talking about doing it on the G4 piece. For all the crazy statements he's made before, I didn't think he'd actually be serious about this one. But that's Jack for you. Just when you think he can't get any more outrageous, he comes back with something even more bizarre.

I think, though, this finally unequivocally shows just what his true aims are. Despite his protestations to the contrary, he actually wants to determine, according to his own twisted values, just what is good and decent for everyone else! For god's sake, who the hell died and made him the arbiter of good taste? (And don't say Jesus Christ. Too obvious. It's a rhetorical question anyway.)

Yeah, like Rockstar would even deign to give him a copy. I hope you're right, Dennis, and that this little childish stunt will be ignored. It'll be great to see him throw another temper tantrum. :)

The whole Wal-Mart thing sounds like yet another attempt by him to take credit for something he had nothing to do with. Par for the course for him. I'm taking it with a big grain of salt. Certain retailers decide not to carry cartian products for whatever reason all the time. Considering how conservative Wal-Mart is to begin with, their decision to not carry Bully (if that really is the case, might just not be listed at the moment), it wouldn't surprise me.

While I'm posting, I know we all say here, "It's a good thing we've got someone like Thompson instead of someone intelligent." But really, I have to wonder. I can't help but think that if JT were taken out of the equation, we might actually have some real progress and discussion being made. Nobody here may like Leland Yee or David Walsh, but at least they have the courtesy to address us in a respectful manner and are at least willing to listen. All Thompson does is distract with sensationalism and histrionics, grabbing the spotlight at every opportunity.

Besides, I don't really see anyone eaxctly lining up to take his place were he suddenly gone. There's Donald Wildmon, but he's pretty much faded away. And not even Brent Bozell seems to be as eager for attention as JT is.

If there's a silver lining to any of this, it's that it looks as if more and more people are finally starting to see him for the fool that he is and are treating him accordingly, and that his career seems to finally be coming to an end. It used to be back in the day that whenever he showed up, it was kind of a big deal. I don't know if it's been due just from our efforts here, but the word seems to be getting out that he's an idiot and there's nothing to fear from him. If it truly is because of the internet, it's kind of poetic justice that the technology he fears so much is contributing to his demise.

(Reply to this) (Thread)

Re: Oh, for crying out loud!
[info]thefremen
2006-08-17 05:20 pm UTC (link)
"While I'm posting, I know we all say here, "It's a good thing we've got someone like Thompson instead of someone intelligent." But really, I have to wonder. I can't help but think that if JT were taken out of the equation, we might actually have some real progress and discussion being made. Nobody here may like Leland Yee or David Walsh, but at least they have the courtesy to address us in a respectful manner and are at least willing to listen. All Thompson does is distract with sensationalism and histrionics, grabbing the spotlight at every opportunity."

I for one agree with you. I just can't stand people who dillute truth by spreading lies and misinformation. We all know that if you spread lies long enough they become the truth. Iraq is the new front in the war on terror now, even though people trying to blow up planes with liquid on a plane! were from Pakistan.

(Reply to this) (Parent)


[info]xeroproject
2006-08-16 11:06 pm UTC (link)
yes Thompson, because Walmart not carrying something is unprecedented....I mean, Walmart doesn't have an established history of refusing to carry other products does it? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wal-Mart_product_controversy [insert eye roll here]

When will this man get over himself?

(Reply to this)

Fidel would be proud.
[info]nightwng2000
2006-08-16 11:10 pm UTC (link)
Once again, John Bruce catches himself lying to the general public as well as to government officials.

In the Tech Web article:
http://www.techweb.com/wire/ebiz/191902549

He claims:
"This is not just some effort by some 55-year-old guy dictating entertainment taste for other people's children."

While his age is irrelevant, he clearly is claiming he isn't out to dictate what is or is not appropriate for other parent's children.

Yet, here in this very suit (as well as stated in the AOTS segment and even in the Tech-Web article), he clearly states that it must be HE who decides if this game is or is not appropriate for other people's children. Even if we ignored the state laws, such as the one in Louisiana, which clearly take away a Parent's Right to decide for their own children, it is clear that Thompson's demands are that it must be HIS and HIS ideals alone which determine what is or is not appropriste for ALL children, his other other people's.

Maybe instead of forcing his obscene religious and personal beliefs on other American citizens and their children, he ought to offer himself up to Castro as Castro's replacement once Castro dies. At least then Castro can be sure his dictatorship style ideals won't fade into the past. John Bruce will keep them alive and well by forcing his own beliefs upon those who are already used to a dictatorship.

nightwng2000

(Reply to this) (Thread)

Re: Fidel would be proud.
[info]jabrwock
2006-08-16 11:24 pm UTC (link)
In the Tech Web article, he clearly is claiming he isn't out to dictate what is or is not appropriate for other parent's children. Yet, here in this very suit he clearly states that it must be HE who decides if this game is or is not appropriate for other people's children.

Doublethink at it's best. Forget Fidel, George Orwell would be proud...

(Reply to this) (Parent)(Thread)

Re: Fidel would be proud. - [info]nightwng2000, 2006-08-17 12:14 am UTC
Re: Fidel would be proud. - [info]barfo, 2006-08-17 01:20 am UTC
*Shakes head*
[info]gray17
2006-08-16 11:32 pm UTC (link)
"If Bully is indeed safe for children's play, then petitioner (Thompson) will be the first to say so."

It wouldn't be declared safe for children's play, no matter what. Current best guess seems to be that the game could easily get a teen rating. Meaning that it would be "safe" for teenagers and on up to play.

However, for the statement "safe for children's play" to be true, it would have to be all children, not just teenagers. Meaning it'd need to be something that'd get a rating of everyone.

(Reply to this)


[info]rhanlav
2006-08-16 11:36 pm UTC (link)
Oh, I wanted to say something, but you know what, its not even worth it. I mean really, me expecting Jack Thompson to not be partisan about the game is like expecting DC to not be partisan. *sigh* Someone save us from this insanity!

(Reply to this)


[info]mirumu
2006-08-16 11:43 pm UTC (link)
He said he would like Bully "fairly assessed by someone, prior to its commercial release, other than a) a hand-picked member of the media and b) the ESRB with its history of, at best, ineptitude in analyzing the content of Take-Two products".

I'd have nothing against an independent and unbiased view but to get that, someone other than Jack would have to carry out the assessment. He's clearly not impartial enough for the task given his past statements or at the very least, his anti-game bias. Should have been obvious to a lawyer as far as I'm concerned.

(Reply to this) (Thread)


[info]triptogn
2006-08-17 01:35 am UTC (link)
Isn't that what the ESRB is doing though? His claim that the ESRB doesn't do the job they are supposed to do is ludicrous. The only way he can try and make that claim at all is by citing "Hot Coffee" which was impossible to access via any game console and needed to hacked out of the code via the PC version to be seen at all. No kid buying the game out of box would have ever seen it without major digging and effort.

(Reply to this) (Parent)(Thread)

(no subject) - [info]mirumu, 2006-08-17 02:49 am UTC
(no subject) - [info]xwaix, 2006-08-17 10:40 am UTC
I could write a book proving Thompson wrong but there’s really no need.
[info]andrew_eisen
2006-08-16 11:43 pm UTC (link)
Under penalty of perjury, I declare the foregoing facts are true, correct, and complete. - Thompson

Really? Okay, let’s look at your very first fact:

Respondents plan to distribute and sell, commencing on October 1, 2006, a violent, interactive video “game” entitled Bully.

Nope. October 17. http://www.rockstargames.com/bully/

You lose. Perjurer.


Andrew Eisen

(Reply to this) (Thread)

Re: I could write a book proving Thompson wrong but there’s really no need.
[info]gamepolitics
2006-08-17 12:09 am UTC (link)
well, to be fair (and I'm not sure why I do that - LOL) perjury requires knowledge that one is speaking a falsehood. Mistakes don't qualify

(Reply to this) (Parent)(Thread)

Re: I could write a book proving Thompson wrong but there’s really no need. - [info]nightwng2000, 2006-08-17 12:22 am UTC
Re: I could write a book proving Thompson wrong but there’s really no need. - [info]tbhodges, 2006-08-17 01:18 am UTC
Re: I could write a book proving Thompson wrong but there’s really no need. - [info]andrew_eisen, 2006-08-17 01:46 am UTC
Re: I could write a book proving Thompson wrong but there’s really no need. - [info]nightwng2000, 2006-08-17 01:47 am UTC
Re: I could write a book proving Thompson wrong but there’s really no need. - [info]andrew_eisen, 2006-08-17 01:11 am UTC
Re: I could write a book proving Thompson wrong but there’s really no need. - [info]nightwng2000, 2006-08-17 01:21 am UTC
Re: I could write a book proving Thompson wrong but there’s really no need. - [info]cecil475, 2006-08-17 01:41 am UTC
Re: I could write a book proving Thompson wrong but there’s really no need. - [info]illspirit, 2006-08-17 01:23 am UTC
Re: I could write a book proving Thompson wrong but there’s really no need. - [info]kajex, 2006-08-17 05:02 am UTC
Re: I could write a book proving Thompson wrong but there’s really no need. - [info]jesdk, 2006-08-17 12:08 pm UTC
Re: I could write a book proving Thompson wrong but there’s really no need. - [info]father_time89, 2006-08-18 04:53 am UTC

[info]pahsons
2006-08-16 11:58 pm UTC (link)
I wonder how he sees himself.

(Reply to this)


[info]jahbulon
2006-08-16 11:59 pm UTC (link)
Link for ya GP : http://nintendo.about.com/od/screenshots/ig/The-62--Violent-Pac-Man/The-62--Violent-Pac-Man.--2e.htm

Dubble youti eff

(Reply to this) (Thread)


[info]slyfoxx
2006-08-17 12:35 pm UTC (link)
Please tell me that's a joke.

If people raised there kids like these whiny pansies want them to, then we'd have Flanders' children everywhere...

"What's that red stuff coming out of kitty's head?"
"...uh that's rasberry jam!"
"If I cut Todd's head open, will I get jam?"

Children should be aware of the concept of violence, lest they experiment on others with dangerous objects and such just to see what happens becaue they don't know any better.

(Reply to this) (Parent)


[info]i_am_stillwater
2006-08-17 12:08 am UTC (link)
He's like a one-man Nielsen's Ratings for video games...

(Reply to this)

I think I know why Jack wants the game.
[info]yzzerdd
2006-08-17 12:15 am UTC (link)

(Reply to this) (Thread)

Re: I think I know why Jack wants the game.
[info]mirumu
2006-08-17 03:15 am UTC (link)
Hahaha, nice! Best laugh I've had all day.

(Reply to this) (Parent)

Re: I think I know why Jack wants the game. - [info]winnie_tee, 2006-08-17 06:09 am UTC
Re: I think I know why Jack wants the game. - [info]thefremen, 2006-08-17 05:32 pm UTC
Jack try to get a copy of Duke Nukem Forever for us!
[info]yzzerdd
2006-08-17 12:17 am UTC (link)
Please!

(Reply to this) (Thread)

Re: Jack try to get a copy of Duke Nukem Forever for us!
[info]terminator44
2006-08-17 12:48 am UTC (link)
Even God himself couldn't get that to happen. :(

(Reply to this) (Parent)

Re: Jack try to get a copy of Duke Nukem Forever for us! - [info]curiousthompson, 2006-08-17 01:49 am UTC

Page 1 of 3
<<[1] [2] [3] >>

Create an Account
Forgot your login or password?
Login w/ OpenID
English • Español • Deutsch • Русский…