Jack Thompson Weighs In On Hot CoffeeGate

Gamespot is reporting that Jack Thompson, the anti-gaming crusader, has weighed in on the Rockstar/ESRB situation. His message is, essentially, that the ESA is a criminal organization run by a thug. From the article: "Doug Lowenstein embarrasses each and every one of you when he holds forth about what the 'Founders' intended when they drafted the Bill of Rights [the first 10 amendments to the Constitution]. For Doug, the Founders are GTA's Tommy Vercetti and Carl Johnson. Doug never met a pixilated prostitute he didn't like, and I'm sure James Madison would be impressed."

Comments

OK

[Otter]

So, now that we've thrown today's chunk of "Mean Grownups Are Mean To Gamerz Because Their Mean!" red meat to the kids...

Has the underlying technical question been figured out yet? Last I heard Rockstar was still claiming the hax0rs had rearranged content from the game to create the "sex scene". The hax0rs are claiming they just unlocked a flag. Obviously one of them is lying -- I don't understand why it's so difficult for someone in possession of the patch to figure out who.

Re:OK

[sH4RD]

Does it matter? The point is that it's locked content that's not intended to be accessable, and thus doesn't contribute to the games rating and is not Rockstar's responsiblity. Yes, they should be more careful about leaving bits and pieces in, but no, if it takes someone else's external mod to activate it, that is not their problem. For example, what if someone took the Unreal engine and created a game on top of it to train terrorists. Then the terrorists used this training to kill people. Is that the Unreal engine creator's fault? No, someone just took their engine and without their knowledge created something else with it. Not their problem, nor should they be held responsible for the games content.

Re:OK

[XenoRyet]

Rockstar bears zero responsibility in this. No matter how much of the code is on the disc, there is no in-game way to access that code or content. Any method of accessing this content would certainly be a violation of the EULA, thus absolving Rockstar of responsibility, and excluding that code and content from the raiting. The simple fact is that no matter how much or little the modders had to do, the content is not a part of Rockstar's published work.

I just wanna know who to sue

[da_Den_man]

/sarcasm Because I OWN the HotCoffee label...../Sarcasm

Seriously, how is it that in an M rated game that contains Cursing (to an amazing level I will say), Gang shootouts, carjacking, pimping, etc,... that this little blurb that was OBVIOUSLY a hack can cause this much controversy? Have these people NO lives? Is no one dying of vegatative states this week?

I own the game. I own ALL the GTA games. They are and HAVE been rated for ADULTS.

Why do people with a voice in the media feel they need to regulate WHAT I as a PRIVATE citizen do in my own home? Why aren't we after the parents that are too busy smoking Meth (I live in the Great NW Meth capital of the world), or the idiots that are planting bombs.....oh...I know....cause that is a DAILY event these days. Nudity in an M rated GAME is NEW!!! UGH.

Jack Thompson is a waste of time

[Cornflake917]

This guy does not have a brain. He is personally attacking Doug Lowenstein, who:

A. Had no say in what got put in GTA:SA.
B. Did not know anything about Hot Coffee Mod when GTA:SA was released (as far as I know).
C. Recommended that the game was innappropriate for children under 17. Which is STILL an adequate recomendation.

Why he isn't attacking the retailers, Rockstar or the hackers, I have no idea. I'm glad Lowenstein didn't respond to Thompson's attacks. The guy is an idiot and only wants to take away people's rights.

Re:Jack Thompson is a waste of time

[Taevin]

While Jack Thomson is an attention starved media jackass, he has never said (that I have seen) that he wants to take away the rights of adults.

He definetly is a jackass and I don't know much about him but: Doug Lowenstein embarrasses each and every one of you when he holds forth about what the 'Founders' intended when they drafted the Bill of Rights [the first 10 amendments to the Constitution].

Sounds to me like he is interested in taking away people's rights. Assuming that quote was not taken out of context by gamespot, he seems to be implying that the Founders did not intend gaming or free speech in gaming to be a right... a scary and mind-numbingly wrong statement to be sure.

Already Taken?

[kaellinn18]

I thought Hot CoffeeGate was when that stupid bitch spilled hot coffee on herself, sued McDonald's, and the legal system ruled in her favor. That marks the earliest I can remember of the beginning of the end in this lawsuit happy country. (I'm only 25.)

This is why we're doomed.

[thomas.galvin]

[T]he Bill of Rights [the first 10 amendments to the Constitution].

This is why we're doomed. If the Bill of Rights needs a footnote, we're pretty much finished.

These people will never be happy

[fixer007]

First they wanted somesort of rating system so that parents could choose what was appropriate for their children. Now that it is in place, they don't seem to care that the appropriate warning is already on the box!

They just take, and take, and take...

Like the Bill of rights means anything

[bluGill]

There is only one amendment to the Bill of rights that means anything close to what you might think it means: the third. Though if the military ever needs more barracks that will change, the supreme court will just say that you cannot [when killing someone in a private house] quarter them, you are limited to drawing. (which is meaningless because bullets and poison are more common)

Some examples:

First: not if you are within 60 days of an election and want to talk politics.

Second: just trying buying a machine gun.

fourth: patriot act

fifth: the phase "public use" is filler with no meaning

sixth: unless you are en enemy combatant

seventh: see sixth

eighth: I can't think of anything for this one actually, but I'm sure there are examples of abuses.

ninth, tenth: These has always been so vague that the courts of ignored it. Besides, intersate commerce can cover just about anything if you are creative enough.

I don't know about James Madison

[talaphid]

But I wager Benjamin Franklin would be thrilled. Ha ha, Founding Fathers were saints, news at 11...