Jack Thompson Buys Stock in GTA Parent Company

omega9 writes "You're not reading it wrong. From an artice posted as Joystiq, "Jack Thompson has purchased shares in Take-Two interactive - otherwise known as the publisher behind the Grand Theft Auto series of games. So has JT suddenly become a financial supporter of the company he's long campaigned against? Not a chance. JT has purchased stock in the company in order that he might attend Take-Two's shareholder meetings and face up to the company's CEO, Paul Eibeler.""

Comments

What a show.

[TripMaster Monkey]

Heck, I'm now considering buying stock in Take-Two, just so I can witness what promises to be the most side-splitting board meetings ever held.

In fact, I smell a new reality TV show...get cameras in there to record all the hilarious action.

We can have viewer participation too, go to the website and enter in the poll....how long will Jack last before Paul gets fed up with his inane babbling and calls the police to have him ejected? How many times will the police have to hit him to subdue him before they drag him out? (We'll have a ringer cop in there, so there will always be at least one punch.)

Imagine a few cops stiff-arming Jack Thompson's face into the drywall....now that's must-see TV! ^_^

Re:What a show.

[91degrees]

Can I buy stock in your TV production company?

Re:What a show.

[networkBoy]

As I read the summary all I could think was: This is gonna be good!

Anyone know where the shareholder meetings are held? I may buy 1 share, just to attend the meetings if they are nearby me (NorCal).

-nB

Re:What a show.

[FireballX301]

Not a board meeting. He'd be nothing more than a shareholder, and shareholders rarely get to actually do much at shareholder meetings other than *possibly* ask one question.

Though given this is Jack Thompson there's a good chance they won't let him speak at all.

Re:What a show.

[Ced_Ex]

Can I buy stock in your holding company?

Re:What a show.

[ndansmith]

Imagine a few cops stiff-arming Jack Thompson's face into the drywall . . .

. . . and then Jack killing the cops, blowing up some fire trucks, trickin' out his ride, smacking the hoes, and stealing a tank to wreak havoc over some generic metropolitan city until he is incinerated by a squadron of army helicopters. Now that's must-see TV!

Re:What a show.

[C0rinthian]

"All right Jack, that it!" :puts 3rd star up on board: "Now we're going to have to call security!"

Re:What a show.

[mordors9]

It really depends on the articles of incorporation and bylaws of the organization. If they are pretty loose and liberal a smart guy can stir up quite abit of trouble, especially if he gets started well before the Board meeting with motions and such.

Re:What a show.

[Drooling Iguana]

Just as long as there's no stiffly pantomined sex involved.

Re:What a show.

[chris_eineke]

Can I buy stock in your Intellectual Property?

Re:What a show.

[Wootzor von Leetenha]

And grabbing a nightstick from one of the cops and using it to beat all the cops to a bloody pulp, then running outside, stopping a car, throwing the driver out and taking off... stopping at the local gun shop and picking up an uzi to carry out some much needed drivebys. now THAT would be ironic.

Re:What a show.

[Anonymous Coward]

by a squadron of army helicopters,

but not before taking a break at his girlfriend's house for some Hot Cof... *assassinated*

Re:What a show.

[AKAImBatman]

Board Member 1: "I motion that we evict Mr. Thompson from all future board meetings."

Board Member 2: "Seconded!"

President: "All those in favor of evicting Mr. Thompson from..."

Interrupting all at once: "AYE!!!!"

President: "Do I hear any Nays?"

Thompson: "Um? Nay?"

President: "The Ayes have it. From this date forward, Mr. Thompson will no longer be allowed to board meetings until such a time as a motion is made and carried to allow him to rejoin these meetings. Considering that the only way I can forsee that happening is if Mr. Thompson owns a controlling share, we can assume for the moment that his banishment is permanant."

Thompson: "But..."

President "Meeting Ajourned."

Re:What a show.

[Surt]

Can I buy stock in your cookie factory?

Re:What a show.

[Oldsmobile]

Just like rain, on your wedding day? Or maybe a free ride, when you've already paid?

Re:What a show.

[Crilen007]

Wonder if he used the 10k he was supposed to donate.

Re:What a show.

[chooks]

smacking the hoes,


<grammar-nazi>

I may not be "hip" on "street" "lingo", but isn't a hoe a garden implement, whereas a ho is the slang word for a prostitute?

</grammar-nazi>

Although it is funny to think of JT going around hitting some random garden tools...

Re:What a show.

[Anonymous Coward]

Can I buy stock in the company that supplies your drugs and hookers?

Re:What a show.

[Sindarius]

Maybe he'd like a little Hot Coffee with that.

Re:What a show.

[Austerity Empowers]

You probably couldn't afford it. However if you laden it down with enough frivolous lawsuits you probably could. *wink wink*

Re:What a show.

[mboverload]

Parent is fucking genius. Mod up.

LOL

Re:What a show.

[Lord_Dweomer]

If I buy stock in your quantum puzzle game, will I be able to buy and sell my shares at the same time?

Re:What a show.

[booch]

Um, any shareholder can typically file a petition to have a proposal put to a stockholder ballot. It's apparently known as shareholder activism.

Re:What a show.

[HTH NE1]

Wonder if he used the 10k he was supposed to donate.

Or if he'll donate the profits earned from his shares to The Society for the Promotion of the Satirical Arts.

Re:What a show.

[booch]

Can I buy stock in your "Happy Fun Ball" company (Wacky Products Incorporated)?

Re:What a show.

[User 956]

Though given this is Jack Thompson there's a good chance they won't let him speak at all.

Either way, the guy gets what he wants.

1. If they let him ask his question, he gets to be the outrageous outspoken anti-videogame guy at the shareholder's meeting. And he'll get media attention.

2. If they don't let him speak, then he gets to be the outspoken anti-videogame guy at the shareholer's meeting -- whose ideas are too controversial to be heard. And he'll get media attention.

The way the media in this country works (based on fear and exaggeration), it's a lose-lose.

Re:What a show.

[SpecBear]

Oh yes, this will be entertaining.

Jack Thompson gets the floor. Paul Eibeler listens to his complaints, and offers him a signed document indicating that Take Two will no longer sell violent games as long as Thompson agrees to shut up and leave the shareholder meeting immediately.

Once Thompson's outside, Eibeler jumps him, beats him to death, takes the contract back, and speeds off to the nearest Pay 'N Spray.

Re:What a show.

[jasonditz]

Indeed, I recall in the late 90's a bunch of activists buying up single shares of Philip Morris and trying to get them to stop making cigarettes. They used to make quite a fuss at those meetings... not that the voting was ever close.

The only shareholder activism I was ever personally involved in was an attempt to get Sun Microsystems to promise not to use slave labor... which got defeated interestingly enough.

Re:What a show.

[Repton]

No --- it just means that you can never simultaneously know what the share price is and how many shares you have...

Re:What a show.

[tonywong]

only if you don't look.

Re:What a show.

[hellfire]

Can Hitler buy stock in your company?

Oh damn, I just ruined the chain.

Re:What a show.

[Anonymous Coward]

hehe thats sounds just like GTA to me.

Re:What a show.

[Khabok]

When you sell those shares, can multiple people buy and hold them simultaneously?

Re:What a show.

[TubeSteak]

Sir;

This sounds like it will encourage trading based on insider information.

We've got our eye on you.

Your friends,
The S.E.C.

Re:What a show.

[Zenmonkeycat]

No, there's a good chance that he'll speak whenever he feels like it. I can just imagine the scene now...

"Alright, so we've just gotten our--"
"Murderers! You all murder cops and children!"
"Okay, anyway--"
"I'll kill all of you! I'll kill all of you and your families! You train killers to murder victims!"
"As I was saying--"
"I will kill all of you just to prove videogames cause violence!"
"Sir, I'm going to have to ask you--"
"CENTIPEDE TRAINED MY CHILD TO KILL THE POPE! PONG KILLED KITTENS! MURDER! AYAHHAHYAHHHH!"

And that's when the security guards pull out the tranquilizer guns.

Re:What a show.

[RussR42]

Chuck Norris
Try this one instead... I believe it was first.

Re:What a show.

[timeOday]

Well, he ponied up for the stock, why shouldn't he have his say? It's just capitalism, people who own things get the power to make decisions and be heard. In principle it's not much different from a shareholder campaigning to get the CEO fired or outsource some jobs or whatever else. Since he's now part owner of the company, he should have a say in proportion to his ownership (which I suspect is relatively small).

Re:What a show.

[xx_toran_xx]

Can I buy stock in your action figures?

Re:What a show.

[Anonymous Coward]

That's odd, because I had sex with your wife last night!

Re:What a show.

[kin_korn_karn]

can I buy stock in Godwin Industries?

Re:What a show.

[calharding]

I'd like to trade this +5 chain for an uncursed bag of holding.

Re:What a show.

[Anonymous Coward]

an attempt to get Sun Microsystems to promise not to use slave labor... which got defeated

URL, please :D

Re:What a show.

[Quarters]

He can't attend a board meeting. At best he can attend the annual shareholders' meeting. Seeing as he'd be the only person at one of those that wouldn't be interested in T2 selling a hojillion copies of GTA4, 5, 6, ....., n in order to make bags of cash I doubt very many other people there will welcome his antics.

Re:What a show.

[SurgeonGeneral]

Not a board meeting. He'd be nothing more than a shareholder, and shareholders rarely get to actually do much at shareholder meetings other than *possibly* ask one question.

Though given this is Jack Thompson there's a good chance they won't let him speak at all.

This is wrong. There are laws that dictate rules for shareholders. For those that dont know here is a summary:

I will assume that the corporation is incorporated in Delaware. Why? Because the vast majority of corporations in the United States are incorporated in Delaware. Why? Because Delware has the most advanced Business Corporations Act in the world, and 80% of the state income comes from incorporating businesses.

Shareholders have rights. They should! They are investors. If the company fails, they lose their money. The corporation therefore owes them a duty. One of their rights is to vote for the board. Another is to submit proposals for the consideration by the board, or to be voted on by the shareholders. The corporation has to pay for the circulation of these proposals. If they fail to circulate a proposaal they can be sued for oppressing the shareholder. Shareholders also get an annual general meeting (AGM). At the AGM, any shareholder can speak on a topic of his or her choice. The corporation itself does not "let" anyone speak - if someone wants to speak, they get to for an alloted time. If they are not allowed, the corporation, again, can be sued for oppression of the shareholder.

The purchase of shares simply for the opportunity to speak occurs all the time. Environmental organizations are well known for doing this: they buy one share, and then speak at the AGM on the company's overseas practices, for example. There is a caveat to the shareholder intiated votes and proposals though : they must be business related. These groups have tried to sue companies for not circulating their proposals1, and they have failed because they are not entitled to circulate non-business matter related items.

That is all I have time to write for now. Any more questions I will be glad to answer.

Re:What a show.

[jasonditz]

It's been a few years... thank heavens sun keeps copies of their proxy statements on their site:
http://www.sun.com/aboutsun/investor/annual_report s/proxy_statement_03.pdf (page 34 and 35)

Note especially that the board recommended that we vote against it... which a majority did... then I sold my shares.

Re:What a show.

[millennial]

If I buy stock in Happy Fun Ball, will I be provoking Happy Fun Ball?

Re:What a show.

[millennial]

Hoes is plural for 'ho', smartypants. Otherwise it'd be 'hos', which is just... stupid.

Re:What a show.

[Anonymous Coward]

"I would like to take a moment to introduce Mr. Jack Thompson who has generously offered to donate ten thousand dollars to the California Children with Aids Society. Come on down Jack...I'd like you to meet some of the kids."

Re:What a show.

[jamstar7]

But will he want Hot Coffee(tm)?

Re:What a show.

[cooley]

I suppose I could see it going down just like that, except that I'm reasonably certain Jack Thompson has no homies.

Re:What a show.

[FuzzyBad-Mofo]

"Shoot to kill.. we're always right!" - VCPD

Re:What a show.

[Feanturi]

a smart guy can stir up quite abit of trouble

So you're saying there won't be a problem then?

Re:What a show.

[ChuyMatt]

DAMN IT!!! IT IS UNFORTUNATE!!! OK, so that is out of my system. I just want to say that jack was raised by a mother who was a street walker. What ever he does, it is the fault of playing GI Joes with his friends. Not because he had crap upbringing where he learned that there was no personal responsibility and its all easy answers.

Re:What a show.

[Wwolmack]

Sounds like a win-win scenario for jack, unless you count:

3. The shareholders laugh him out of the room.

Theres no better way to disarm somebody than to laugh at them.

Re:What a show.

[Typoboy]

Can I buy stock in your Open Source Email Company?

Re:What a show.

[stiggle]

Wait till the stock rises and he makes some money from them.
Then we can have the "Jack Thompson profiteering from video game violence" as a headline.

Re:What a show.

[bbtom]

You forgot the essential component: he then delivered Thompson's body to the nearby dog food factory, where he is turned in to a new brand of dog food.

Re:What a show.

[Chriscypher]

Can I buy stock in your sucking software?

Re:What a show.

[Anonymous Coward]

I'd buy that for a dollar.

Re:What a show.

[WillyMF1]

Theres no better way to disarm somebody than to laugh at them.

If only Bush had thought of that instead.

Re:What a show.

[Anonymous Coward]

What? that come with a USB vacuum?

Re:What a show.

[hesiod]

Can I buy stock in a dead joke?

Re:What a show.

[Anonymous Coward]

sure, but to minimize the cost of the transaction, we ask that you pay via PayPal and we will send you a link where you can print off your certificate! Isn't taht GREAT!

Re:What a show.

[hesiod]

> This sounds like it will encourage trading based on insider information

Of course, once someone sees and divulges the information, it is no longer accurate!

Re:What a show.

[hesiod]

> Theres no better way to disarm somebody than to laugh at them.

Replace "disarm" with "antagonize." If he gets such a response, do you seriously think he'll shut up? No, he'll write a damned article about it and try to sue someone for encroaching on his self-appointed right to never be made a fool of (despite the fact that he does it quite well by himself).

Re:What a show.

[hesiod]

> then delivered Thompson's body to the nearby dog food factory, where he is turned in to a new brand of dog food

I don't know if dogs would eat it. Well, I guess they DO lick their own assholes...

Re:What a show.

[hesiod]

> Seeing as he'd be the only person at one of those that wouldn't be interested in T2 selling a hojillion copies of GTA4, 5, 6

OK, we know there are laws about companies doing things not in the interests of their shareholders... What if it is other shareholders trying to make a company do what isn't in the best interests of other shareholders? Are there any repercussions for something like that?

Re:What a show.

[bbtom]

One of my dogs has had a bout of diarreah recently. Perhaps she chewed off a piece of Jack Thompson's anatomy.

Re:What a show.

[Flendon]

Oh damn, I just ruined the chain.

No your forgeting Quirk's exception to Godwin:
Intentional invocation of this so-called "Nazi Clause" is ineffectual.

Re:What a show.

[mikefe]

Hoes is plural for 'ho', smartypants. Otherwise it'd be 'hos', which is just... stupid.

So is the word 'ho'.

And I'm not talking about what the fat white guy in the red suit says either.

Re:What a show.

[millennial]

I think it's clever, myself. It's short for both [w]ho[re] and ho[oker].

Re:What a show.

[mikefe]

I've said "Who're you" before and had some women get offended because of the second meaning it has.

Subject?

[Landak]

The worrying thing is that this is probably going to allow him to have a greater influence over GTA than all that publicity did. However, I still think the next GTA will hit the shops irrespective somehow....

Re:Subject?

[SatanicPuppy]

What? I own a few shares of Microsoft stock, so if I go to a shareholders meeting and demand that the open their source code, somethings going to happen? DAMN! Why didn't I think of that before?!?

Unless he bought a metric buttload of stock, he's going to have no effect on the development of any of Take Twos games, and more than any other super-minority stockholder would have on product development at any other decent-sized company.

Jesus, their market cap is 1.26 billion I really don't think they have anything to worry about from a prick who was too cheap to pony up 10k to a charity.

Re:Subject?

[Anonymous Coward]

Not really. I doubt he'll be buying a majority share, and even if he did and then tried to restrict Take Two's commercial activities for a personal political objective, the minority shareholders could sue him for it.

Re:Subject?

[Drakonite]

Unless he bought a metric buttload of stock, he's going to have no effect on the development of any of Take Twos games, and more than any other super-minority stockholder would have on product development at any other decent-sized company.

I'm sorry, but even with a metric buttload of stock he wouldn't have enough, he'll need at least a metric shit-ton to make any difference at all.

The only difference he is going to make is raising the value of their stock by adding another person into the bunch that wants to buy it...

makes sense

[TheScottishGuy]

the guy's a jackass, but he's at least doing something relatively sensibly.

Re:makes sense

[Anonymous Coward]

I don't know. It is rather paradoxical to be investing in a company you don't like -- i.e. handing them the capital to make, well, in this case, more games.

It makes about as much sense as Greenpeace investing in, say, Dow Chemical or ExxonMobil.

But I have to hand it to him for the audacious originality of the idea.

Re:makes sense

[fightzombies]

from your comment, it's not quite obvious that your read the article. calling microsoft's flight simulator a training program for terrorists is not what i'd consider sensible.

Re:makes sense

[afinnie]

1. Go to meeting filled with people who want nothing more in life than to make money. 2. Tell everyone that even though sex and violence sells video games faster than cocaine at a country club, they should abandon the business model. 3. ??? 4. Profit!

Re:makes sense

[Nuskrad]

I don't know. It is rather paradoxical to be investing in a company you don't like -- i.e. handing them the capital to make, well, in this case, more games.

It makes about as much sense as Greenpeace investing in, say, Dow Chemical or ExxonMobil.

But I have to hand it to him for the audacious originality of the idea.

Actually, it's quite common for people who oppose a company to buy shares in order to protest at their shareholder meetings. Infact, I know at least one case where Greenpeace have done this, they bought shares in Amoco to try and block oil drilling in Alaska. See this page for more info on that case.

Re:makes sense

[Anonymous Coward]

It's not exactly original, protest groups have been doing this sort of thing for years.

Re:makes sense

[TheScottishGuy]

my point was that even though i don't agree with him, it makes more sense to try to be present at the meetings where he has a right to be heard rather than standing in the street shouting at the wind.

Re:makes sense

[tsm_sf]

calling microsoft's flight simulator a training program for terrorists is not what i'd consider sensible.

It's a training program for terrorists like Yahoo's yellow pages is a telephone directory for terrorists, or Google is a search engine for terrorists...

"Why, XXX is nothing more than a YYY for terrorists!"

Yes, and for EVERY OTHER PERSON ON THE FACE OF THE EARTH

Re:makes sense

[Anonymous Coward]

i.e. handing them the capital to make, well, in this case, more games.

Actually, when you buy shares of a public company, unless it is done as part of an initial public offering (IPO), the money does not go to the company at all. Instead, it goes to whomoever you bought the stock from.

OK

[Amouth]

the funny thing was when i first clicked on the read more link i got the "Nothing for you to see here please move along" page from slashdot..

almost as if we where not alowed to discuse it..

i guess the server knew a flame war was coming..

so Let it start

Re:OK

[piquadratCH]

i guess the server knew a flame war was coming..

Why should there be a flame war? I think we all here at /. can agree upon the fact that J. Thompson is a conservative prick, can't we?

Re:OK

[harp2812]

As a conservative prick, I find that comment highly offensive. ;)

Re:OK

[rich_r]

"Sir, I resemble that comment!"

What a dick

[Megaweapon]

"At one point, JT refers to Microsoft's Flight Simulator as a training simulator for the 9/11 terrorists"

I'm sure the other shareholders will be just thrilled to see this jackass try to ruin the company.

Re:What a dick

[breckinshire]

In related news, Emperor Palpatine bought some shares of LucasArts, as they actually let you simulate attacking the Death Star.

Re:What a dick

[Anonymous Coward]

If JT actually did write this claim, can MS sue for libel? That's a pretty heavy charge to levy on anyone, even MS. Of course, in this day and age, it seems the terms "terrorist" and "9/11" are thrown about so casually that they've lost their impact.

Re:What a dick

[sneakers563]

I realize this is besides the point, but what the heck. For the record, MS Flight Simulator is absolutely nothing like flying a real airplane (at least the 172 isn't - I've never flown an airliner). The throttle settings are incorrect, the roll rate is wrong, the view is wrong, it doesn't behave or feel anything like the real thing. The idea that you could use MS Flight Simulator to learn to fly or to train to do anything is ludicrous. If you've used flight simulators before learning to fly you have a small advantage in that you know what the controls do in theory - that's it. I suppose you could figure out that the WTC was at the southern tip of Manhattan island using FS, but you could figure that out from any reasonably large scale map just as easily.

Re:What a dick

[Rorschach1]

Let's hope Jack doesn't find out about X-Plane...

Re:What a dick

[Anonymous Coward]

For the record, I hold every pilot certificate for airplanes that the FAA offers including several type ratings and have given more than 2000 hours of instruction in small aircraft (including over 1000 in Cessnas) and I can tell you that you are FULL OF SHIT. For the record, I've also spent many hundreds if not thousands of hours with MSFS over the years and my name appears in the credits of two (alas no longer with us) other general aviation flight simulators.

While of course there are bound to be differences between a PC and the real thing, the fact is that if your controls are properly calibrated, you most certainly can make MSFS, including using the default aircraft, behave quite plausibly like the real thing. View? Did you even bother changing the view? It's adjustable in many ways in MSFS.

I know that students who come to me having a lot of "PC flying time" under their belt are in general quite well prepared compared to non-flight sim users. (Though the PC flyers often some bad habits, such as instrument fixation). More than that, however, is that once they start their training, I can tell them what to do in MSFS so that they can practice at home and be better prepared for their next lesson. Collectively, my students have saved thousands of dollars by doing this.

"Roll rate is wrong." - 100 hour wonder, stop with the hangar talk already, ok?

Re:What a dick

[Schnapple]

Dr. Bob Arnot made this exact same argument days after 9/11

Google Cache of related article

Penny Arcade take at the time

So this isn't the newest sentiment in the world. Just further proof that the world doesn't understand video and computer games.

Re:What a dick

[smellsofbikes]

I disagree. It's obviously not a skyhawk -- it's a computer. But when I spend ten hours practicing steep turns and instrument approaches using MSFS and then go do them in the 172, I'm markedly better than when I haven't done any practice at all and try and do those same things in a 172. Yeah, so the throttle settings aren't perfect -- do you *ever* look at the throttle? I just look at the tachometer and make sure it's either in the green or if it's not that I know WHY it's not (and have carb heat on.) When I was getting my PPSEL cert, my instructor said he could actually tell when I'd been spending lots of time on the flightsim because my flying skills were markedly better from lesson to lesson, whereas my LANDING skills, the point where MSFS is the most far-off of ALL, still sucked. I flared like a startled starling, coz MSFS goes from 'similar to flying' to 'complete nonsense' in the last bit of final. But for the large-scale stuff: establishing a scan, establishing a coordinated turn, setting, reading, and reacting to radio navigation, getting comfortable with pattern work, ground reference maneuvers in a strong crosswind -- MSFS is quite good and made/makes a very significant difference in how prepared and comfortable I am in the skyhawk after a month of not flying. Now if only they had realistic ATC simulation, with the interminable "say again" and people stepping on each other as you're trying to hear if you do actually have clearance to enter the airspace...

Re:What a dick

[Anonymous Coward]

>>whereas my LANDING skills, the point where MSFS is the most far-off of ALL,

That proves it. The terrists didn't need to know how to land so they used MSFS and CRASHED TEhY FUKKIN CRASHED

Video games kill peepul.

Re:What a dick

[smellsofbikes]

I don't like Thompson and I think he's crazy. With that said, *I* think forty hours on a flightsim would give a person more than sufficient skill to fly a plane into a building, especially considering that totally untrained people have been known to safely land airplanes with considerable radio instruction. And with THAT said, you'd have to ban a lot more than just MSFS to keep us all totally safe from potential nogoodniks. Libraries wouldn't have anything more than coloring books, probably not even the crayons for those books, because you can do stuff with wax, y'know, DANGEROUS stuff. I bet even Thompson doesn't really believe that modern life can be safe -- he just, for whatever irrational reason, hates computer games. If he had a whit of reason, he'd be spending his time picketing Detroit for their weapons of terror that kill 40,000 Americans a year, but he's too busy being a hot air generator.

Re:What a dick

[nharmon]

I agree with parent, grand-parent is 100% bull. Microsoft Flight Simulator is a great tool for student pilots of any level. Flying the aircraft is easy...you can learn that in a few hours. The hard part is in following procedures and multitasking. I perfected VOR navigation in MSFS using a real aerial chart. You can't beat that.

Re:What a dick

[dilvish_the_damned]

"At one point, JT refers to Microsoft's Flight Simulator as a training simulator for the 9/11 terrorists"

Like railroad tycoon teaches you how to tycoon. Nintindogs teaches youi how to train a killer attack poodle. In fact, to carry this rediculous point way to far, its exactly like the way Diablo 2 teaches you how to raise the dead and jump to an inhuman yet comical distance in order to umm, the things you normally do with undead.

Re:What a dick

[Coniptor]

He should take up hot ait balloning.
Sorry couldn't resist.

Re:What a dick

[Anonymous Coward]

I think you're wrong. My neighbour is a pilot, he flies 747s for a living, and he uses MSFS when training at home. He told me he uses it to train for approaches to particular airports, because they all have some local rules which he has to remember and he is tested on them regularly. I don't recall him having any criticisms of the realism of the flight algorithms; in fact I think he said he prefers to do the training at home rather than the simulator at the airline. He's obviously not losing something by doing that.

Re:What a dick

[Anonymous Coward]

I'm interested to know how landing in MSFS is different from realworld landing. What is unrealistic about the landing in MSFS?

Re:What a dick

[pommiekiwifruit]

I thought it was odd that Microsoft released a new version of flight simulator on 9/11/2001 (9th of november that is) with a double page magazine poster that had the release date printed that way. They could have changed the release date by a day to avoid that.

Re:What a dick

[Quarters]

Uh, no.

MSFS can be used to supliment real training. Both the US Navy and the USAF use it for just such tasks.

When I started my private pilot training I build a fairly accurate representation of my local airport (KCHO) in MSFS. I'd spend my evenings practicing my landings; short field, soft field, crosswind, etc... While my muscle memory wasn't being trained, as the control system was quite different than a real C152 I was able to work through the steps, get the timing down, and always see where I should be relative to the runway at every step.

While the stall modeling in MSFS is pretty bad it is good enough to practice setting up for power-on and power-off stall maneuvers. Those, along with S-turns, turns around a point, steep turns, and engine-outs are all easily practiced in MSFS. I had pre-built flights for all of those basic maneuvers. My own private virtual practice area was always just mouse-clicks away.

I solo'd at 12hrs, whereas the national average is 20+. I took my checkride at 41hrs. The legal minimum of hours necessary before a checkride is 40 and the national average is 50+. You can't tell me that using MSFS didn't help my training.

Re:What a dick

[Scoth]

I say the hard part is landing :) It was *years*, starting with Flight Simulator 2 on an Atari 8 bit at the tender age of 7 or 8, before I could nail landings most of the time. Now I consider myself a Flight Sim expert at least in doing things pseudo-properly. I still haven't had any real flight time but I plan to change that in the near future. I semi-recently graduated to X-Plane (had a DVD of it for awhile, but just recently got my computer upgraded to where it'd run it reasonably). MSFS isn't horrible, but X-Plane is dramatically better for realism by and large. It doesn't have as much eye-candy scenery building-wise, but for actual flying it's pretty incredible.

Besides, full 90* combat turns in a 777 is darn fun ;)

Re:What a dick

[bronney]

Exactly! As just as sibling says, the relation of 911 and MSFS is valid because they're not exactly "landing" the plane. Just as grandparent's total BS about the view settings. Ever seen the photo of 8 Multi-Monitor setup on MSFS? All you needed for 911 was a pitch, a yaw, a throttle, and no flaps.

Re:What a dick

[MaineCoon]

While I do not have nearly as much flight experience as you (I have a whopping hour at the controls have a helicopter).

I play Desert Combat and Battlefield 2 a lot, particularly using the helicopters. When I went for my helicopter flight lesson (fullfilling one of those "things I want to do in my lifetime"), the trainer was impressed with my ability to fly and manage the controls, particularly in maintaining a 3-control hover for extended time; the trainer claims (don't know how true) that only 1 in 100 (or was it 1/1000?) first-time students can maintain a 3-control hover in their first lesson. He suggested that my time playing video games probably had something to do with that, and I'm inclined to agree there: I already had some basic training via video games to responding to changes in the horizon (tilting/rotating), and that made it much easier to compensate.

My issue was a lack of checking instruments; I was so used to (virtual) flying by view and the horizon that I tended not to check my speed/altitude often enough and would go too fast or get too low/high in general flight.

Re:What a dick

[Alioth]

I hold an FAA PP-ASEL/AMEL/G/IA (for those who are not familiar with the FAA pilot ratings, that's private pilot, airplane single engine land, plus airplane multiengine land, plus glider, plus instrument airplane). Back in 1997 when I was working on my private, I used MSFS plus CH pedals/yoke to learn how to do crosswind landings properly. Although the MSFS plane doesn't react precisely as a real one does, it does react in the correct sense and the correct magnitude. I found MSFS very helpful in learning crosswind landings.

Also, I found MSFS very helpful as a basic instrument trainer for my instrument rating (although I wish it had better instrument failure modes - the proper PCATD style sims are much better for that, especially as they have a separate station for the Bastard Instructor From Hell)

Re:What a dick

[JThundley]

As somebody named JT, I beg everyone to not call Jack Thompson JT.

Does this guy have all day to stalk people?

[tulak_horde]

I thought this guy was supposed to be a practicing attorney. Does he ever do any real work? How is it he has so much time to squander on this childish crusade of his?

Re:Does this guy have all day to stalk people?

[Anonymous Coward]

It's not his fault. His mom bought him the Crazy Lawyer(tm) boardgame when he was a kid.

Re:Does this guy have all day to stalk people?

[Lifewish]

Well, last thing I heard he'd been kicked off one case for being a nutjob, so maybe he does have all day to muck about.

Re:Does this guy have all day to stalk people?

[pete6677]

He is proof that some people are motivated by power rather than money. Clearly that is the case here since he is sacrificing money, along with what remains of his reputation, all for the feeling of power.

Re:Does this guy have all day to stalk people?

[Anonymous Coward]

Won't someone PLEASE think of the childeren!

Re:Does this guy have all day to stalk people?

[Schemat1c]

I thought this guy was supposed to be a practicing attorney. Does he ever do any real work?

Of course not, he's an attorney.

Re:Does this guy have all day to stalk people?

[91degrees]

Lawyers are expected to do a certain amount of "Pro Bono" work. They are expected to spend a certain amount of their time working without pay for the public good. Protecting the kiddies from violence probably counts.

Re:Does this guy have all day to stalk people?

[KaiLoi]

I was actually just thinking about something the other day. I noticed in the "intelligent design" article 2 days ago : http://science.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=05/12/2 0/1656228&tid=99&tid=14

If you go to the eskeptic link there is a mention of a lawyer who helped form the group campaining for creation theory.

"The Thomas More Law Center (TMLC), founded by conservative Catholic businessman Tom Monaghan and former Kevorkian prosecutor Richard Thompson, was itching for a fight with the ACLU from the time of its formation in 1999."

I note that Jack Thompson is also known as Richard Thompson in some documents and his domain registration. Could it be that this is the same lawyer thompson?

Anti-game crusader and creation theory nut? If so that would just be too rich for words.

Re:Does this guy have all day to stalk people?

[numark]

I note that Jack Thompson is also known as Richard Thompson in some documents and his domain registration. Could it be that this is the same lawyer thompson?

Not at all. Richard Thompson is a former prosecutor, whereas Jack Thompson is a private lawyer. The name being used by two people who somehow are tangentially linked through Slashdot stories is pure coincidence.

Re:Does this guy have all day to stalk people?

[Moofie]

That's perfectly logical, since there are no private lawyers who are also former prosecutors.

Re:Does this guy have all day to stalk people?

[psu_whammy]

If by "real work," you mean:

• taking the time to respond to every last e-mail sent to his inbox
• calling the Penny Arcade guys instead of responding to the e-mail just to scream at them and hang up on them
• Coming up with ridiculous game ideas, attaching a promise of a charity donation, and then going back on said promise
• forwarding e-mails to Scott at VGCats, then feigning ignorance when called on it, then threatening a harassment lawsuit saying that he started it
• generally being enough of a douchebag that the people who agree with you disassociate themselves

then yes. Otherwise... not so much. He'd make a fantastic stalker, though.

Re:Does this guy have all day to stalk people?

[Feanturi]

How is it he has so much time to squander on this childish crusade of his?

Well, it's certainly evident that he needs practice.

Re:Does this guy have all day to stalk people?

[numark]

To clarify even more, Jack Thompson has been practicing as a private lawyer for longer than Richard Thompson has been retired. I doubt that many current prosecutors are also practicing private lawyers at the same time, if they're even allowed to do so at all.

Re:Does this guy have all day to stalk people?

[Anonymous Coward]

No, he's still practicing.

Yes he has.

[d34thm0nk3y]

So has JT suddenly become a financial supporter of the company he's long campaigned against? Not a chance.

Despite his reasoning he has in fact become a financial supporter of Take Two by investing in their stock.

Re:Yes he has.

[generic-man]

How do you figure? Take Two didn't receive any money by him buying one share of stock; the effect such a transaction would have on a share price is pretty minimal.

If Michael Moore can own stock in Halliburton, why can't Jack Thompson own shares of Take Two?

Re:Yes he has.

[durbinshroom]

Actually, it's highly unlikely that any of the money from his purchase of stock went to Take Two, unless he bought the stock as part of a new offering.

The money would have gone to whomever was selling the stock at the time. So, at some point in the past money was handed over to the company, but in the aftermarket for stocks the money doesn't go to the company.

Something interesting to consider is that he now owns a portion of the company, and therefore benefits in some small way from the publication of the games he is trying to stop. So in some small way, the blood he claims is spilled due to these games is on his hands as well.

Re:Yes he has.

[SuiteSisterMary]

If Shadowrun has taught us anything, it's that owning one shiny stock certificate in the corporation that interests you is a good thing, as it entitles you to their stockholder information releases, their meetings, and so on.

Re:Yes he has.

[generic-man]

It's true that you can attend shareholder meetings and cast proxy votes if you own a share of stock, but any information released to shareholders by a publicly-traded company has to be made available to the public, usually by way of an SEC filing of some sort. You can listen to conference calls, get annual reports, etc., on-line too even if you're not a stockholder.

Re:Yes he has.

[ShibaInu]

Despite not directly benefitting Take-Two by buying their stock, he does benefit them in other ways. Buying stock and keeping it drives up demand for the stock. Take-Two can then issue more stock and benefit from a higher price.

It should be noted that buying common stock doesn't automatically get you invited to shareholder meetings. You have to own a fair amount for a certain amount of time to get youself really heard.

Also, since GTA is Take-Two's money machine, I very much doubt other shareholders will want to see that product go away.

Re:Yes he has.

[HardCase]

Public companies need stockholder approval before they can issue new common stock. It doesn't happen often for obvious reasons. While buying stock and holding it may drive up the stock price, a significant amount of the stock has to go off the market - way, way more than JT can buy. In most cases, the company's performance determines the stock price much more than holding stock does.

Buying common stock does get you invited to the stockholders' meeting. It doesn't mean that you'll get to ask your question, but you do get to go to the meeting.

-h-

Re:Yes he has.

[DrXym]

So aside from being an asshole, he is now a hypocrite. I wonder what ultra violent games his shares make him a party to producing.

Re:Yes he has.

[DeusExMalex]

If Michael Moore can own stock in Halliburton, why can't Jack Thompson own shares of Take Two?

Becauase no one takes Michael Moore seriously - just like no one takes Jack Thompson seriously.

Re:Yes he has.

[shut_up_man]

This is very true, and there's bugger all chance he'll be offered the floor at a shareholder meeting. This is just a weak attempt at trying to stay in the headlines, and squeeze any remaining publicity out of his connection to Take Two. Ignore him, in six months the only Jack Thompson anyone will remember will be the blokey Australian actor: http://www.imdb.com/name/nm0860233/

Re:Yes he has.

[Gogo0]

Something interesting to consider is that he now owns a portion of the company, and therefore benefits in some small way from the publication of the games he is trying to stop. So in some small way, the blood he claims is spilled due to these games is on his hands as well.

Not that I condone Jack Thompson's crusade in any way, but it is much harder to make changes to any organization from the outside. I think he is wasting everyone's time with his BS, but I think that he is finally doing something that could help him -though at this point, he is a joke. It's too late for a good idea.

Re:Yes he has.

[terrymr]

I'm not trying to defend Michael Moore here, but how would somebody find this out ?

I'm pretty sure my broker won't tell you what stock I own, and unlike the president my tax returns are not published.

Re:Yes he has.

[generic-man]

Technically it's not "Michael Moore owns Halliburton stock," but "a foundation Michael Moore started owns Halliburton stock." Non-profit organizations have to reveal their assets and tax returns publicly so that would-be donors can perform due diligence. Moore's own personal holdings are not published though.

Re:Yes he has.

[sammy baby]

Please. Maybe you don't take Michael Moore seriously, but the guy pulled down $118 million for Farenheit 9/11, and that's just its theatrical run.

Re:Yes he has.

[Anonymous Coward]

Yeah, and Fahrenheit 9/11 is one of the main reasons I can't take him seriously any more. I saw that movie. It was incredible. And I still believe everything in it. But as good as it was, it didn't work. To hear Moore in the run up to the election, his film and the hype surrounding it virtually guaranteed Bush would lose. Well, so much for that idea. So what's your next big plan, Mike? You've already proven yourself impotent.

Re:Yes he has.

[TrancePhreak]

If you believe everything in F911 then you should get your head checked. I don't mean to troll, but it seriously was a hacked together piece of trash. There were quite a few flaws, and even the newspaper headline was made up.

sweet

[iamdaflash]

he could present some cool game ideas!

Re:sweet

[chrismcdirty]

Are they finally gonna make the game he presented?! It's gonna be great!

Re:sweet

[Anonymous Coward]

Like "Pin the tail on the jack-ass"?

Re:sweet

[DyslexicLegume]

They already have:

http://www.fileplanet.com/157860/150000/fileinfo/G TA:-San-Andreas---Defamation-of-character:-A-Jack- Thompson-murder-simulator

Re:sweet

[dyslexicbunny]

Somehow I doubt 'Petition Against Non-Conformist Games' or 'Forty Year-old Lawyer Adventures' would attract a huge audiance.

Re:sweet

[Infinityis]

He could even make a motion to donate to some charity or something...

Talk about an ugly realization

[Brento]

I'd hate to be the guy who realizes he sold his Take Two stock to Jack Thompson.

Re:Talk about an ugly realization

[lgarner]

If I sold it at a gain, I'd be perfectly happy.

Re:Talk about an ugly realization

[chillax137]

Are you kidding?? The news that he wants to have some control is probably going to bring the stock price down. It would be the perfect time to sell :)

Re:Talk about an ugly realization

[extremescholar]

Not going to make a lot of money seeling low. You need to rethink your business model.

Re:Talk about an ugly realization

[Anonymous Coward]

I think Thompson has the bigger problem buying the stock. The SEC has laws against insider trading, and conflict of interest. How can he legally sue a company where he owns stock?

Imagine buying stock, and hyping the games with "bad" publicity. See the stock go up because people buy them to see what's the deal. Then, sell your your inflated stock just before the suits judgement.

Re:Talk about an ugly realization

[DG]

Hey, cut him some slack. He's still in the "??" stage of his business plan.

DG

Re:Talk about an ugly realization

[Anonymous Coward]

So, just short the stock.

Easy peasy.

Re:Talk about an ugly realization

[nuggz]

If you short a stock, then publicly sue the company that would be insider trading.

You can not take advantage of non public information when trading securities. They are pretty serious about this, Martha didn't go to prison because of her fashion sense.

We get it...

[Anonymous Coward]

...he's a fucking nut. What else is new?

Can we just stop paying attention to this nutcase?

[mad.frog]

Seems to me this guy is way more about self-promotion than anything else.

Comment on the articles site

[chkMINUS]

I enjoyed this comment that someone left in regards to the article... "Okay, the whole violence in video games thing I can understand from Jack Thompson, but Flight Simulator as training for terrorists? He might as well attack Pac Man for being a training simulator for devouring small objects, harmful to children under 3." Posted by Zero_

Re:Comment on the articles site

[Anonymous Coward]

Isn't this the joke? That if video games really caused people to act strange, then the teenagers of America would be running around in dark rooms popping pills and listening to repetitive music.

Re:Comment on the articles site

[Anonymous Coward]

I guess you've never been to a rave before.

Re:Comment on the articles site

[StikyPad]

It's not that we don't get it, it's just not funny anymore.

Re:Comment on the articles site

[Feanturi]

He might as well attack Pac Man for being a training simulator for devouring small objects, harmful to children under 3

But it's true! I played CSI and now I know how to find and catch murderers. I'd just have to watch for my hand to change as I waved it about the room and that would tell me I could start randomly running through my tools in that area to get some sort of clue, and that's it, I'd have him cold.

And whenever I feel like getting a hot chick to slap me across the face I just fall back on my early Leisure Suit Larry training.

In Support of Jack.......

[MajorDick]

Someone needs to write an "Murder Simulation" of all the morons like himself.

Maybe a "Litigator Murder Simulator", for attorneys and judges that listen to his crap
Throw tipper in there for good measure
The goal of the game would be to erradicate from society as many of these types as possible.
Unfortunatley the game would ONLY comprise, a pond and a vacum cleaner, whereby the goal was to suck up the pond scum, that covers most of the above mentioned persons

oh well.....

What do you call 100 lawyers at the bottom of the Ocean ?....a good start.....

Re:In Support of Jack.......

[gm55]

Q:What's the difference between a bucket of sh*t and a lawyer? A: The bucket.

Bad dog

[Red Flayer]

Barking up the wrong tree.

As a shareholder, he's got the right to be heard, if the board gives him the floor. I truly hope they don't, since his points are almost definitely not germane to the purpose of the meeting. I'd like to see the rules governing shareholder meetings at Take-two.

If he really wants to be heard, he should buy a controlling stake in the company... not that he could afford it.

Anyone know if Ryan's a majority shareholder? He'd put JT in his place so fast, Thompson wouldn't know up from down, left from right, A from B, B from A, Select from Start.

Re:Bad dog

[dr_dank]

Thompson wouldn't know up from down, left from right, A from B, B from A, Select from Start.

Don't give an ass like him infinite lives!

Re:Bad dog

[leabre]

Someone played too much Contra when they were younger...

Thanks,
Leabre

Re:Bad dog

[Drooling Iguana]

There's no such thing as too much Contra.

Re:Bad dog

[not-real-sure]

Anyone know if Ryan's a majority shareholder? He'd put JT in his place so fast, Thompson wouldn't know up from down, left from right, A from B, B from A, Select from Start.

I was going to moderate but i decided to post instead. Great line you got here but it needs a little something extra.

It should have been:

Anyone know if Ryan's a majority shareholder? He'd put JT in his place so fast, Thompson wouldn't know up up from down down, left right from left right, B A B A Select Start.

My tribute to CONTRA fans all across the world.

Re:Bad dog

[Hrodvitnir]

Don't worry, it's only 30.

Re:Bad dog

[SheeEttin]

Well then he'd have to hit Down, down, up, up, right, left, right, left, A, B, A, B, Select; and that's just not right!

Re:Bad dog

[Darthmalt]

Actually, contrary to popular belief on Contra that only gives you 30 lives. I used them up on purpose one time.

Re:Bad dog

[Scudsucker]

Of the origional anyway. The sequels pretty much suck.

As Dave Chapelle would say...

[yamamushi]

WHAT?

Why doesn't he..

[swab79]

..just gun down all the share holders... that's what I'd do.

Re:Why doesn't he..

[Anonymous Coward]

What I'd do is ride up to the building in my Blista Compact weilding a shotgun, a machine gun, a pistol, a chainsaw (for good measure), and a hippie.

Me: We gonna go fuck these guys up. Can you shoot?
Hippie: Kid, I'm a hippie. The only thing I've shot is acid. I did see a guy snort it once though. Thought his nose was a kangaroo and the moon was a dog!

But don't listen to me, I'm just an impressionable youngster.

Re:Why doesn't he..

[crazdgamer]

..just gun down all the share holders... that's what I'd do.

That would be the Penny Arcade approach.

Which would be kinda ironic if that actually happened... given their history.

How many shares?

[thewldisntenuff]

TFA doesn't say how many shares - I wouldn't worry too much (Note I said "too" much). The shareholders will realize who he is and either ignore him totally or try to buy up his shares.

He probably doesn't own more than a few shares - just enough to be a "shareholder" and raise holy hell at the shareholders meeting. Maybe a publicity stunt? We haven't heard much from Jack in awhile now. Besides, isn't the Florida Bar Assoc. looking into his conduct at this time?

http://arstechnica.com/news.ars/post/20051019-5458 .html

Best plan ever!

[Anonymous Coward]

By purchasing stock AND trying to sue the company, he garutees that no matter the outcome, HE WINS!!

Re:Best plan ever!

[oahazmatt]

Wouldn't that generate a conflict of interest in the eyes of a judge?
Either he's supporting the company (financially through shares), or he isn't (by suing).
And I realize I'm reading too much into a joke.

Re:Best plan ever!

[Anonymous Coward]

It also means that no matter the outcome, he loses.

Re:Best plan ever!

[pxuongl]

or maybe his owning stock in a company that he's suing, it might be seen as stock manipulation... but i don't see how that'd be beneficial for him... but then again, does having it be profitably necessarily mean it's not illegal?

Can you imagine...

[komodotoes]

...growing up in a house where Daddy thinks that (flight_sim == jihad)? This guy needs attention alright, the psychiatric kind.



NeverEndingBillboard.com

Grrr

[Kraeloc]

Damnit, I can't wait until someone that idiot pisses off one of the few gamers who are crazy and violent, and gets himself shot or something. If there was any justice in the world, god would have struck him down with a bolt of lightning by now.

Re:Grrr

[oahazmatt]

That would backfire horribly. The only thing noticed more than an out-spoken idiot is a martyr. He's been preaching video games encourage violence, and to be intentionally struck down by a gamer would only bring legitimate attention to his cause.

Re:Grrr

[Kraeloc]

Yes, but it would make me feel better for the tens seconds before I realized that.

Dialogue

[Ginza]

I can just picture the board meeting. Jack Thompson: You guys are evil!! I hate you! My mommy hates you too. Take-Two: Shut up. We don't care.

my my my

[Cmdr_earthsnake]

The prudes and the censors try to censor in a revised way.

How clever of them, it will fail as always though... MUWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!

Whats that I smell?

[arkham6]

Why, I think its the smell of an impending minority shareholder lawsuit.

Hmm. Smells suspisiously like feces, too.

Re:Whats that I smell?

[kwhite]

I would think the judge would throw it out on the basis that this person knew what they were buying before hand. I could see if he owned it before all this stuff came out and not afterward. But I've been known to be wrong before.

Re:Whats that I smell?

[Lazbien]

Hate to point this out... but...

Shareholders have the right to vote in directors, vote on issues affecting the continuity of the company, appoint an auditor, receive residuals upon corporate wrapup, and of course recieve dividends. That being said, the only way minority shareholders can bring action against the majority shareholders / directors if the action the majority /directors is:
  - Ultra vires of the Corporation (from the articles of incorporation)
  - Personally affecting the rights of minority shareholders
  - If the corporation has failed to comply with the procedural requirements for approval of the actions (ie: not putting a major decision to a shareholder vote)
  - If the actions of the majority constitutes a fraud on the minority shareholders (ie: an attempt to appropriate the shares)

Now, for the minority shareholders to take derivative action, it will only go to court if
  - Satisfy the court that all internal attempts to have the matter resolved have been exhausted
  - All reasonable demands to rectify the problem were refused by the directors

Action is granted if
  - Reasonable notice was given to the directors of the intention to apply
  - It would appear in the interests of the corporation
  - The complainant shareholder is acting in good faith

And the courts can
  - Order the corporation to purchase the shares of the aggrieved
  - Restrain the improper conduct
  - Order the liquidation and dissolution

What's funny about Old Mr. Thompson's actions is that what I had listed above is taught in first year law. Did Jacky-boy go to law school? Does Jacky-boy think that his actions can satisfy any of those conditions and hope for dissolution?

No, no they can't. But it was a nice quixotic attempt.

Case closed. Next case?

Re:Whats that I smell?

[Anonymous Coward]

...what I had listed above is taught in first year law.

What law school teaches corporate law or business organizations in the first year?

Most law schools teach subjects like torts, contracts, property, civil procedure, legal research, and maybe criminal law or constutional law in first year. Subjects like corporate law are relegated to second- or third-year (and maybe then as electives -- I've been out too long and don't remember on that point).

Random sampling from a Google search:

http://www.swlaw.edu/academics/courseinfo/firstyea r
http://www.campusaccess.com/campus_web/educ/e4grad _lalif.htm
http://www.law.emory.edu/cms/site/index.php?id=540

This is awesome..

[bluebanzai]

I am suprised he didn't do this earlier. I am so glad I am not a boardmember of Take-two...

Re:This is awesome..

[Supurcell]

I am suprised he didn't do this earlier. I am so glad I am not a boardmember of Take-two...

You and me both! I just wouldn't be able to bear listening to some zealous nut at work all day and then be driven in my Rolls-Royce to my mansion. I would probably be so exhausted that I would have to spend the rest of the night with my super-model girlfriends in my hot tub.

Well, yeah. It was.

[Anonymous Coward]

Hell, long before 9/11 I used to buzz the Twin Towers all of the time. I'm not trolling. Back then it was stupid, innocent fun. (No one was hurt but a few pixels on my screen.) Now when I play the sight of the WTC makes my heart ache. And yes, I know about the patch. I chose not to use it.

Sure, the terrorists learned a bit about flying using Flight Simulator. So did many decent pilots.

I can kill you with a screwdriver, but that's not what a screwdriver is for. Don't blame the tools or the toolmakers, blame the sick bastards who use them for the wrong means.

Re:Well, yeah. It was.

[shawb]

I remember playing MS Flight Sim at my friend's house. What we usually did was try to fly a 747 BETWEEN the towers. So if gamers were on plane and found a last minute opportunity to seize the plane, the video game could have even provided training for those who wished to stop the tragedy.

Re:Well, yeah. It was.

[Coniptor]

I think we should also blame the asses that should be doing their job and enforcing the laws we do have and practice common sense in dealing with these issues.
If idiots like Jack Thompson ruled the world. We couldn't be safe unless were all tied up in straight jackets according to his thinking.

Webcast!!

[GweeDo]

Please, please, please stream that meeting over the internet please! I would even pay to see that meeting!

Who the hell is Jack Thompson?

[mattite]

And why should I care? A better headline would be "Nutjob does crazy shit to stalk Take-Two CEO."

Re:Who the hell is Jack Thompson?

[Anonymous Coward]

Which answer do you want: The fun one or the not so fun one?

Re:Who the hell is Jack Thompson?

[MS-06FZ]

Ah, but that would make the headline [i]clearly biased[/i]. And as everyone knows that is never allowed to happen on Slashdot.

Re:Can we just stop paying attention to this nutca

[Anonymous Coward]

I disagree, everyone should continue to pay attention to him, it has been the best free comedy ever. he will never win in his arguements, because he is just not good at arguing, he gets too flustered to easily and goes off on rants that no judge will ever take seriously. if he argued well, i would be against him, but in this case I want him to keep going, the longer and harder he tries, the more and more that people will associate anti-video game attitudes with wingnuts and stop paying attention to all of them. in a small part in the back of my mind i wonder if he works for someone involved in making GTA, he guarentees them press exposure. it's like with the first Postal game, the game is absolute crap as far as games go, but it was huge and the absolute only reason I ever even heard of it and then played it, was the enourmous amount of publicity it got. any press = good press. jack thompson is a solid boost of sales figures for GTA games by keeping them in the limelight. if that's bad, then i want jack thompson to ban me too.

I'm just hoping...

[ecko3437]

I'm just hoping that Take Two does what they did about Driver: Put in a character named Jack (or maybe John) Thompson (rather than Tanner). Didn't Tanner get shot? Yes... that would be fun.

Wait a minute

[Anonymous Coward]

Does he have to sue himself now?

WHO CARES ANYMORE

[BLueSS]

How long is this really going to continue? Jack Thompson, Hot Coffee; Jack Thompson, Hot Coffee; Jack Thompson, Hot Coffee; Jack Thompson, Hot Coffee; Jack Thompson, Hot Coffee; Jack Thompson, Hot Coffee; Jack Thompson, Hot Coffee; Jack Thompson, Hot Coffee; Jack Thompson, Hot Coffee; Jack Thompson, Hot Coffee; Jack Thompson, Hot Coffee; Jack Thompson, Hot Coffee; Jack Thompson, Hot Coffee; Jack Thompson, Hot Coffee; Jack Thompson, Hot Coffee... There, some more publicity for the two most annoying headlines.

to make this complete

[SmallOak]

They should invite Jerry Springer to chair the meeting. Chairs will fly.

It's interesting how this is news. He should be treated like we treat the guy in bus that's talking very loudly to himself in four letter words.

Re:to make this complete

[jferris]

You mispelled Steve Ballmer...

Re:to make this complete

[Anonymous Coward]

> They should invite Jerry Springer to chair the meeting. Chairs will fly.

Not without Stevie-B! (zing)

Re:to make this complete

[merc]

They should invite Jerry Springer to chair the meeting. Chairs will fly.

No, that was the episode in which Steve Balmer did a guest appearance.

Re:to make this complete

[SmallOak]

good one. Ok that would just be too freeky

Clumsy tactics.

[91degrees]

If they've got any sense, Take Two know he's going to be at the Shareholder meeting. They have some idea of what he's going to do. I'm not sure if it's legitimate to table a motion the Jack Thompson is immediately removed from the meeting, but I'm sure they will have some sort of process to deal with him. Personally, I'd hire a skilled debater with a fondness for video games to field any questions he might have, solely to make a fool of him.

Re:Clumsy tactics.

[C0rinthian]

Personally, I bet they're making popcorn for the festivities. It's not often that a shareholder meeting has so much entertainment potential.

Re:Clumsy tactics.

[rkanodia]

Entertainment? I doubt Jack will even make it to two stars.

sokaiya?

[belmolis]

The big question is, does he have any yakuza buddies? Some Japanese gangsters, known as sokaiya, buy shares in companies so as to have the right to attend shareholder meetings, then exort money from the company by threatening to disrupt the meeting.

Re:sokaiya?

[vertinox]

CEO Take 2: "The panel gives Jack Thompson the floor... (oh good grief)"
Jack Thompson: "I'd like to start of on how horrible all of you peo..."
Yakuza_1: "Revere the Emperor!"
Yakuza_2: "Expel the barbarian!"
*Guards appear out of the woodwork and drag Jack screaming and kicking down the aisle*
Yakuza_3: "Bonzai!" *beats the restrained Jack with a bamboo stick*

What a sad man

[bobocopy]

I seriously mean it, I feel so bad for Jack. He's like a McCarthy... he's dedicated his life to this thing that had some followers once, but is now disappearing. And since that's how he defined himself, he's just clinging to it. He's really just the object of ridicule, and he's going to end up like McCarthy: face-down, drunk in a gutter. If I prayed, my prayers would go out to him.

Re:What a sad man

[91degrees]

I agree. He has a fair pint - that games are very violent, they trivialise violence, and they seem to be targetted quite strongly at children, and generalyl speaking, it's preferable not to expose kids to violence. These are valid points, and some people may disagree with them, he'd still have a lot of support if he stuck with them.

The problem is he goes totally overboard. When you start calling the games murder simulators, saying MS Flight Simulator is jsut a terrorist trainer, and blaming games for any and all violent acts, you start soundding like a complete fanatic, and lose any support you may have had.

Re:What a sad man

[slavemowgli]

Mine too, but I'd pray *for* him ending up face-down in the gutter. :)

New Business Model

[rAiNsT0rm]

1. Become powerful politician 2. Rail on company until stock prices drop 3. Buy now lower priced stock 4. Profit! 5. ???

Re:New Business Model

[Anonymous Coward]

How about this:

1. Become a politician
2. Make fanatical stand against something
3. Switch sides when defeated
4. Profit?!

No need for ???, it works every time.

I hope he does the right thing...

[Warlock7]

What's JT going to do with all of the earnings he makes from the stock? Is he going to donate it to a worthy charity or just pocket it and make a profit from the company he hates so much? Poor JT...

Re:I hope he does the right thing...

[TubeSteak]

He only makes money if the value goes up & he sells it.

If he's smart enough to avoid some negative PR, he'll tell his broker to set the sell price at the price he bought it for.

All this assumes he sells it and doesn't hang onto the company like a leech.

Re:I hope he does the right thing...

[Warlock7]

If you take the time to read the BS that he puts together, you'll understand that he lives for negative PR and he's not that bright...

Re:I hope he does the right thing...

[maglor_83]

Well, he couldn't in good conscience give the profits to charity. Such dirty money would surely damage its reputation!

Capitalism sucks!

[Oldsmobile]

And this is precicely the reason why capitalism is the root of all evil!

Re:Capitalism sucks!

[Anonymous Coward]

No, / would be the root of all_evil

Wow, I just realized something

[wheany]

Wow, I just realized something: "Jack Thompson" is an anagram of "flaccid penis".

Re:Wow, I just realized something

[Anonymous Coward]

No it isn't Jack Thompson only has one 'c' in it. 'flaccid' has two 'c's

Re:Wow, I just realized something

[Oldsmobile]

"Wow, I just realized something: "Jack Thompson" is an anagram of "flaccid penis"."

That is so true! I played around with the letter and came up with:

Smelly Fat Cunt

Horrible Gangrene

Wormy Brain Pan

And the funniest of them all:

I masturbate to goatse.cx

Cool how having a . in your name makes it so much easier.

Re:Wow, I just realized something

[Anonymous Coward]

JAM CHOP KNOTS sounds like a cooler anagram

GTA has a parent company?!

[noamt]

Isn't it against their interests?

Re:GTA has a parent company?!

[Anonymous Coward]

GTA has a parent company?!

Called Rockstar Games... Take Two juts publishes it.

Re:GTA has a parent company?!

[kingj02]

Isn't it against their interests?

That's what I was wondering. As a shareholder, doesn't he have the responsibility to do what's best for the company? As an exagerated example, can Bill Gates buy up 49% of Red Hat and then deliberatly fuck up the company? My guess is no, and if Jack starts making negative public comments about a company he's a shareholder off, the others will go after him.

Re:GTA has a parent company?!

[Red Flayer]

" As a shareholder, doesn't he have the responsibility to do what's best for the company? "

No, not at all. As a shareholder, all he has to do is what he thinks is best for him.

Officers of the corp, executives, management? Different story.

Re:GTA has a parent company?!

[Rude Turnip]

"As a shareholder, doesn't he have the responsibility to do what's best for the company?"

No, and I can prove it. I own some Google stock, now watch this: GOOGLE SUCKS!!! See, nothing happened. Seriously, it is the job of the employees and board of directors to do what's best for the company.

"...can Bill Gates buy up 49% of Red Hat and then deliberatly fuck up the company?"

Once you own more than 5% of a public company, you have to file your "intentions" with the SEC. Owning 49% of a company is far different than Jack Thompson buying a stock certificate from oneshare.com. 49% might get you a number of board seats, depending upon the company. In which case, the other shareholders would sue him for breach of fiduciary duty if he did bad things with the board seats.

Re:GTA has a parent company?!

[noamt]

I apologize; this was intended as a joke, not anything else. The joke is that GTA is supposedly anti-parents... never mind ;-)

Re:GTA has a parent company?!

[numark]

Not to mention that buying 49% of most large companies would be close to impossible. This would require that 49% of the shares even be available for purchase at any one time. When you exclude insiders, institutional investors, and pension plans from the mix (all of whom are less likely to sell their shares), 49% would be one extremely hard proposition.

Re:GTA has a parent company?!

[SheeEttin]

if he did bad things with the board seats

Like let the dog sit on them?

Re:GTA has a parent company?!

[thej1nx]

if he did bad things with the board seats

Like let the dog sit on them?

Since Jack will be the one sitting on them, above statement is redundant.

Re:GTA has a parent company?!

[nuggz]

The management and board of directors have a responsibility to act in the best interests of the shareholders.

The shareholders are merely the owners of a company, like the owner of a hamburger they can do pretty much whatever they want to it. For example I own stock in a brewery that makes a rather poor beer (worse then coors light IMO).
Some people complain that I should "support my company", but there is no legal requirement for me to.

Despite my lack of enthusiasm for the product, I still expect the management to run the company to the best of their ability, and quite honestly they are, I've made some very good money off it.

Re:GTA has a parent company?!

[khallow]

As an exagerated example, can Bill Gates buy up 49% of Red Hat and then deliberatly fuck up the company?

Or buy a competitor and shut them down. Often you can't just fire the employees, drop the customers, and burn the place down, but there are legal ways to destroy the company over a few year period and keep the old customers. As I understand it, a well-used developed world tactic is to layoff each year a fraction of the workers at a facility. Eventually, you'll get the place below the threshhold over which the workers get mandatory benefits or employment protection. At that point, fire or move whoever is left over. Move, sell, or destroy the capital equipment by this time. Transfer the customers to your desired product. If you do it smoothly, they might not even notice.

Re:GTA has a parent company?!

[Geoffreyerffoeg]

As an exagerated example, can Bill Gates buy up 49% of Red Hat and then deliberatly fuck up the company?

Isn't that what Oracle did to PeopleSoft? It's called a hostile takeover. Most of the time the company convinces 49% of its current shareholders that it's not a Good Thing to sell to Bill Gates.

Re:GTA has a parent company?!

[Anonymous Coward]

As a shareholder, doesn't he have the responsibility to do what's best for the company?

No.

The company has an obligation to "do what's best" for the shareholders. I believe this is usually interpreted as meaning what gives the shareholders the best return on their investment.

Re:GTA has a parent company?!

[OldManAndTheC]

it is the job of the employees and board of directors to do what's best for the company.

I believe that the lack of personal responsibility is the prime reason for the psychopathic, anti-social tendencies of public corporations. Shareholders, the true owners of the company, claim they have no control over its actions, and are thus not responsible. Managers claim to work for the benefit of shareholders, and blame their actions on "fiduciary duty", which many of them seem to interpret to mean doing whatever is necessary to make a profit. And employees of course are just following orders. The board of directors has nominal power, but in reality most corporate boards are made up of cronies, tokens and toadies and are utterly toothless.

So who bears ulimate moral responsibility for the actions of a corporation? Just as if you are trying to assign blame for the actions of a mad dog, you must look to the owner.

Re:GTA has a parent company?!

[Rude Turnip]

"I believe that the lack of personal responsibility is the prime reason for the psychopathic, anti-social tendencies of public corporations."

Agreed.

"Shareholders, the true owners of the company, claim they have no control over its actions, and are thus not responsible."

They really don't have any control, unless they are large, institutional investors or insiders, like management or board members.

"Managers claim to work for the benefit of shareholders, and blame their actions on "fiduciary duty", which many of them seem to interpret to mean doing whatever is necessary to make a profit."

Upper management would be one of the "responsible parties."

"The board of directors has nominal power, but in reality most corporate boards are made up of cronies, tokens and toadies and are utterly toothless."

Not in my experience. They are appointed by the large shareholders or are in fact those large shareholders. This is where most of the power is.

"So who bears ulimate moral responsibility for the actions of a corporation?"

The upper management and board of directors; since they are the ones making the decisions.

Re:GTA has a parent company?!

[OldManAndTheC]

I don't think we disagree about any of the facts, but we seem to have reached opposite conclusions. Look at any corporate charter: power over the company resides with the shareholders, exercised through the board of directors whom the shareholders elect. Of course those elections are normally pro forma affairs, and whatever slate is nominated is overwhelmingly approved. And why shouldn't it be? Management and shareholders are almost always united in the desire to make money, it is only when the two come into conflict that there is any tension over corporate governance.

True, upper management and the board are the ones making the decisions, although most boards are just rubber stamps. I may have been waxing hyberbolic when I described them as "toadies", but it isn't far from the truth; most boards are very deferential to upper management, and unless there is something going on that poses an obvious risk to the company they are more than happy to go with the flow.

Trouble is, most evil corporate acts affect those without a say in corporate governance, such as employees, or those completely outside the company such as customers and society at large. There is little incentive to "do no evil" if those affected can't influence the decisions.

And I disagree that those who make the decisions are the ones responsible. It is the owners who are ultimately responsible for a company's actions. You can delegate authority, but not responsiblility.

Jack Sux

[Anonymous Coward]

Allow me to be the 506427751st to say: "Jack Thompson is a prick." I hope he either gets escorted out by the police or better, everyone just ignores him and acts like he doesn't exist..

Brilliant

[stinkyweezelteets]

This is a brilliant investment scam. I wonder how much he bought. 1. Present yourself as a raving loon against video games 2. Buy large amounts of shares in video game companies under the guise of trying to make this better for "the children"(tm) 3. Raise a stink while gaining more publicity for said company. 4. ??? 5. Profit.

Re:Brilliant

[termite666]

Couldnt agree more , bought 200 shares myself , right now I am up about 75 cents a share .I know some is calling me a scum bag too BUT I made 16 $ per share off of Halliburton too .

Childish pun

[bobocopy]

I hear he does mostly pro-boner work.

It's just symbolic

[ShatteredDream]

He wants to be heard, but no one else is going to listen to him inside the company. A company that is willing to publish a game that is as pure of a target for regulation as GTA is not going to listen to a shareholder who might hold 0.001% of the company's assets.

Of course, if he really wanted to make a name for himself, he'd go after Wal-Mart, Target, etc. for not actually enforcing the rating system. What good is a mature rating on a game if the stores flat out refuse to fire employees for not enforcing the rating? As for the argument that more games should be AO, that's bullshit, and even GTA with its sex scenes wasn't AO. Anyone seen the movie Taking Lives? It had a full on sex scene with Angelina Jolie that was pretty damn explicit, yet it got a R rating which is analogous to a Mature rating.

AO really shouldn't even exist because Mature implies that your player can actually handle R-rated material in a movie. The difference between NC-17 and R is purely subjective, and quite frankly, any game that really does deserve an AO rating is probably over the top and should subjected to scrutiny as it is probably wantonly pornographic and violent in a way that would make Id blush and Take Two start furiously scribbling down notes.

Re:It's just symbolic

[Anonymous Coward]

Anyone seen the movie Taking Lives? It had a full on sex scene with Angelina Jolie that was pretty damn explicit,

Well, if they haven't before, they will now!

Could this be the first instance of a video store being Slashdotted?

Re:It's just symbolic

[Anonymous Coward]

The sex scenes were really pretty tame, and not worthy of anything more than the rating the movie got. Original Sin was about the same level.

Regardless, the movie was complete crap from start to finish, and I'd strongly recommend anyone against actually watching it.

Re:It's just symbolic

[Anonymous Coward]

Linky.

9-11, Flight Simulators, and Jack Thompson

[Dark Paladin]

I could almost understand his issue with violent video games like "Grand Theft Auto III" and such. As a father, I don't let my children play them (ages 6, 3, and 1), and reserve those for my own use. While I don't feel that such games contribute to overall violence, I also know there are many better games to be playing with my children (like "Dragon Quest VIII", "Mario Kart", etc).

But I can give a certain amount of respect to Mr. Thompson for standing up for his beliefs and going after them. Or, I would, except his true views were shown when he went after Bill Gates for making "Microsoft Flight Simulator".

By accusing MS for being part of the cause of the 9-11 attack on the World Trade Towers, I'm afraid that Mr. Thompson has shown a view that's, well, crazy, for lack of a more polite word. In his universe, flight simulators aren't used to give people an idea of what it's like to fly a plane - it's used by terrorists to kill people. In his world, Tetris probably isn't a challenging puzzle game - it's a method for people to learn how to fit blocks together to seal people inside a la "The Cask of Amontillado".

By Mr. Thompson standards, we would be banished into a world as bad as that ruled by the Taliban, where music, dancing, games, laughter and fun are simply scary things to trick people into doing evil. A game of "cops and robbers" played out by kids 20 years ago would be seen by him as encouraging crime.

So, while he might have had my respect in the past for at least working on something he perceived as a problem, he's shown himself to be in the worst light of those who would deny any human joy for fear of corruption.

Sorry, Jack. When I get home, I'm going to play a game of Chess with my daughter and Sorry with my son - or in your mind, "encouraging my daughter to commit mass atrocities on the battlefield and teaching my son to inflict suffering upon others and encouraging retribution".

Re:9-11, Flight Simulators, and Jack Thompson

[Anonymous Coward]

By Mr. Thompson standards, we would be banished into a world as bad as that ruled by the Taliban, where music, dancing, games, laughter and fun are simply scary things to trick people into doing evil.

Borderline Godwining the thread here, but how do we know that's not his real intention?

Re:9-11, Flight Simulators, and Jack Thompson

[StikyPad]

I don't let my children play them (ages 6, 3, and 1), and reserve those for my own use.

It's about time somebody took a stand and just said no to infants playing GTA. Bravo, sir. Bravo.

Mr. Thompson has shown a view that's, well, crazy, for lack of a more polite word

Mr. Flanders? Is that you? Shame on you for using that kind of language. ...he's shown himself to be in the worst light of those who would deny any human joy for fear of corruption.

Right, or there's the off chance that he's just rabble-rousing and stirring up controversy for the publicity.

I know, I know.. it's a stretch to think that a bona-fide attorney might actually spout off about something without a) knowing what he's talking about or b) even believing what he's saying. It's just that I heard a mean-spirited rumor that the Bar is starting to admit people without regard to their moral fiber, and part of me can't help but wonder...

Re:9-11, Flight Simulators, and Jack Thompson

[interstellar_donkey]

When I read the "MS flight simulator" bit, my screwball alert went off too. I thought 'What's next? Should we ban Mavis Beacon teaches typing because it helps train virus writers to type faster?'

The shame is that there doesn't seem to be any rational force out there watchdoging video games. I don't have kids, but when I get them I'd like to have a good resource to look towards to see if somthing is really bad. That does not mean censorship. As a full grown adult I don't want to be told what I can and cannot buy because there's a chance a child might be adversly effected by it. Give me the tools to help me direct what's good for my child and what isn't.

But instead I hear so called "parent's groups" getting bent out of shape over the "hot coffee" scandle. What, they're somehow shocked that a game that overtly promotes killing, drugs, prostitution, theft, gang warfare, gambling and dozens of other immoral and illegal activities that happens to also include nudity if you modify the game? As if any reasonable parent out there would think all of the bad things the game advertises would be alright for thier kids but the sex part isn't. The game isn't for kids. Period.

Any group who can't understand the difference can not be counted on to help parents out.

Re:9-11, Flight Simulators, and Jack Thompson

[AeroIllini]

In his universe, flight simulators aren't used to give people an idea of what it's like to fly a plane - it's used by terrorists to kill people.

Shouldn't he be out shutting down every damn pilot licensing school in existence then? I mean, if everyone who plays MS Flight Simulator is training to be a terrorist, then what the hell are all those PILOTS planning?! My God, every building in the country is going to be hit by a plane!

-----

"Flaps, check. Aelerons, check. Rudder, check. Tower, this is November Six Five Niner Whiskey Tango requesting clearence for jihad training on runway 2."

"Roger, November Six Five Niner. You are cleared for mass murder simulator."

Re:9-11, Flight Simulators, and Jack Thompson

[Grendel32]

I do agree at fist i thought jack thompson was doing a good job of putting out information about violent games. now it seems he has gone off the deep end and has burned a lot of bridges on the way.

Re:9-11, Flight Simulators, and Jack Thompson

[Anonymous Coward]

That would be the ESRB.

Take2 should pay dividends..

[demonic-halo]

That'll be funny if Take2 declared quarterly dividends.

So each time Jack has a case against some other game company. They can say that Jack is being paid by Take2.

Trespassing?

[TheFlyingGoat]

Can't they just refuse him on the property and have him arrested for trespassing if he comes anyway? He would then have to file a complaint with the SEC, which would most likely side with the company given Thompson's purpose in wanting to attend.

They could also allow him in, and then file a restraining order if he disrupts the meeting. I belive the restraining order law would trump the SEC rules.

Re:Trespassing?

[Anonymous Coward]

I love it when Slashdotters pretend they're some sort of legal experts.

There's a reason that lawyers get paid so much, while you're probably just a zitty 20-something who watches Firefly.

Re:Trespassing?

[91degrees]

I doubt they have a right to refuse him on the property. He has legitimate business there as a shareholder. And in a similar way, he has a certain justification for distrupting the meeting.

Re:Trespassing?

[Anonymous Coward]

So are you saying you know something about the law that the GP doesn't, or are you just a zitty 20-something who watches Firefly? Right now, I'm thinking thee latter.

Re:Trespassing?

[geekoid]

No, unless he becomes to much of a nuisense.
He is hardly the first to do this, and he wont be the last.

Anything I can buy to help?

[failedlogic]

I'd like to contribute money to the cause. Lawyers are the major problem of Western society, not video games.

So.... where can I send in money to stop nut-job lawyers from getting a law degree then accumulating wealth, power and media attention?

Re:Anything I can buy to help?

[TubeSteak]

So.... where can I send in money to stop nut-job lawyers from getting a law degree then accumulating wealth, power and media attention?

An abortion clinic?
/cringes

Or you could try donating money to teach kids about condoms/abstinence.

The best way to lower the # of lawyers is to nip this population problem in the bud.

I have a new word for people like JT.

[Pantero Blanco]

The word is "litigiterrorists".

Re:I have a new word for people like JT.

[jcm10]

What's wrong with Lawyer?

Re:I have a new word for people like JT.

[iapetus]

What's wrong with "asshats"?

What Jack Thompson wants...

[technoextreme]

http://www.gamespot.com/gba/puzzle/thebiblegame/in dex.html?q=bible%20game
Then again knowing the Bible it might even be unacceptable for him.

Re:What Jack Thompson wants...

[Dr Damage I]

He'd have a coronary when he discovers what's in the "song of solomon" stage

Re:What Jack Thompson wants...

[Feanturi]

Then again knowing the Bible it might even be unacceptable for him.

Actually, he was quoted somewhere as saying that the violence in the Bible is fine because no innocent victims were involved. Basically he's saying that it's ok to kill if God tells you to. Any other time it's bad, but if God says so, then git 'er dun! Terrorists think that way, don't they?

Uh, can you say "conflict of interest"?

[Anonymous Coward]

As stockholder, he is making money from the product he despises. That's weird enough, but I just realized: is it allowed for a lawyer to be an advocate in a legal case against a company if you own stock in that company? It would seem an obvious conflict of interest. Does he have any pending cases (that he hasn't been booted off)?

In other news...

[Locke2005]

Take-Two CEO Paul Eibeler announced today that he was buying stock in a Florida insane asylum in order to guarantee him access to speak to Jack Thompson in the near future...

Don't care for Jack Thompson, but fear litigation?

[Anonymous Coward]

So you hate Jack Thompson, but fear litigation? Fear not!

The Babbling Buffoon is Back

[BigCheese]

I'm not surprised. That man craves media attention more then dignity. I'm sure we'll be hearing from him again.
Thompson isn't the sort to get worked up over. He'll just embarrass himself publicly and lose any credibility he has left (if any). Just be thankful he isn't competent. His media whoring makes his cause look as ludicrous as it is.

Go make some popcorn, sit back and enjoy the show. It looks like it's going to be a good one.

Silly Question

[spudgun]

If GTA trains us all to be killers
and everyone Hates Jack

why is he still walking around ?

Maybe someone should rent "Roger & Me" for Jac

[camusflage]

Simply because he's a shareholder does NOT mean he gets to ask a question. Anyone who has seen Roger & Me can attest to Michael Moore's lack of success in asking his question at the GM annual shareholder meeting.

I don't think so

[JSBiff]

I think, generally speaking, you might be right. In this case, I don't think Jack is currently involved in any active cases against them because, as you say, he was kicked off the cases he was working on (I think).

As a stockholder, you don't necessarily make any money of the company - only if the share value goes up. :-p

But, this tactic of buying a stock in a company you are aligned against isn't uncommon. It gives you, as the article mentions, the right to attend the shareholders meeting, and potentially some other benefits as well.

Right.

[t_allardyce]

Would anyone mod me down if I was to say that Jack Thompson is a retard who better not be trying to take over Take2 to take my GTA away from me?

Some hon. members: Oh, oh.

[s20451]

I hear he does mostly pro-boner work.

Did he graduate magna cum laude?

Deathwatch

[Anonymous Coward]

Don't worry - his conduct suggests severe alcoholism and according to the odds, he'll be dead from massive trauma injuries sustained in a catastrophic car wreck. In a sad note, he'll also kill 2 other people in the process. I predict he has 93 days to live so we should be reading his obit around the weekend of March 25th,

Just in time for spring cleaning.

the formula

[mrcdeckard]

1. rant against co. creating huge media blitz
2. invest in said company
3. ???
4. PROFIT!!

GTA MMORPG

[cskrat]

You just gave me an idea for the next GTA game.

Imagine being in the GTA world with hundreds of other players and being able to take sides with one of the factions or with the local cops if you so choose. Imagine going on a mission not knowing if you're going to be facing a group of dim-witted NPC's or player characters. When you run a police baracade one of the cops may comondeer a civilian sports car to chase after you.

Of course then Jack would be able to say that you're killing real people in the game world and would start babling even louder about the evil murder simulator.

Re:GTA MMORPG

[Fulcrum of Evil]

Of course then Jack would be able to say that you're killing real people in the game world and would start babling even louder about the evil murder simulator.

Big deal, I do that today, and I get points for doing it. Of course, my toon is a blue skinned elf, so that's totally different.

Open source holding companies.

[hackwrench]

I keep thinking we should all form what might be called "open source holding companies" for the sole purpose of gathering enough stock in a company to force them to open source their code by slim majority vote. Once their source is open, the shares can slowly be sold off to buy the next company to force the code open. Sure, there are flaws in the proposal as stated here, some might say huge gaping ones, but the point is to get a few ideas out there.

Re:Open source holding companies.

[SatanicPuppy]

Pretty cool, but it's damn hard to get enough shares to pull off something like that...Oracle has a market cap of 63 billion, Microsoft has a market cap of 283 billion, Sun only has a market cap of 15 billion, but I find I don't care so much about java these days...

We'd have to be able to pick up 25-35% of the stock to have a hope of forcing something like that, and we'd also have to be able to handle it if the release of the source caused the company to tank (which it might). Ugly scene. We might be better off putting our cash into creating better open source solutions. Damn patents are all kinds of annoying though.

Re:Open source holding companies.

[SnapShot]

Let's start with the Big Kahuna...

1. Open source geeks gather 141.5 billion dollars to buy 50.01% of Microsoft.
2. The remaining 49.99% owners realize that some open source geeks now control their company. Share price falls by half as they bail.
3. Open source geeks open source Microsoft's source code and announces that Microsoft will now be a services company. Share price falls by half again (at least).
4. Open source geeks sell their shares for 35 billion for a net loss of 106.5 billion dollars.
5. ???
6. Profit!

Re:Open source holding companies.

[Qzukk]

The point isn't to profit, the point is to opensource their software.

Besides, you think geeks care how many thousands of dollars they throw at crazy shit, as long as it looks like something cool to do? If it were possible to buy 50.01% of MSFT, they'd be all over it. I can see it now, MSFT stock certificate shirts at ThinkGeek, only $1592!

The problem with the plan is that the vast majority of these companies own the majority of the voting shares of their own stock, themselves, and only sell either a minority of full stock or lower-class shares to the plebes and geeks, or else never go public at all.

Re:Open source holding companies.

[hackwrench]

That's why you start with smaller companies. Companies that have less to lose and more to gain by having their code open sourced. Done the right way, stock in such companies can even go up. That's when the holding companies divest of their shares. See Corporate raid for more information.

Re:Open source holding companies.

[808140]

The problem with the plan is that the vast majority of these companies own the majority of the voting shares of their own stock, themselves, and only sell either a minority of full stock or lower-class shares to the plebes and geeks, or else never go public at all.

When a corporation buys its own stock -- refered to as buying shares for the treasury, or equivalently buying treasury shares -- they are not able to exercize voting rights. They can sell the shares, or, if the board agrees, retire them, registering an accounting gain or loss as a result, but the ownership of this common stock does not confer the rights of an owner upon the corporate entity itself, as per SEC and FASB regulations (and IASB as well, as I understand).

Of course, individual persons -- such as management -- may own shares in their own company, and often do. These shares rarely represent a controlling interest, however, especially in large companies. The reason is simple: a company typically finances its operations with a mixture of debt and equity (as per its WACC). Financing means, of course, that the corporation expects money in exchange for shares it sells to the public (including insiders, such as management). Generally, when a firm IPOs, the core management team will retain a controlling interest in the firm for as long as they can -- but this is difficult to maintain because said core management team will probably splinter and break up as time goes on.

Now, I don't know about Microsoft (because I haven't checked) but I don't think Bill Gates or any one person in the company owns a controlling share in the company (but I might be wrong on this count, anyone less lazy than me is free to check). For example, Paul Allen was cofounder -- he presumably had a lot of Microsoft stock that he sold or still owns. He probably did not sell all this stock to Bill Gates.

In practice though, if BG owns 35% of the company, this ends up being almost as good as a controlling share, because the remaining 65% of shareholders don't necessarily see eye to eye on most things.

They would, however, see eye to eye on something as ludicrous as freeing all of Microsoft's software (I say ludicrous from a business perspective, not from an ethical perspective -- I essentially agree with RMS's position that proprietary software is not ethical, but that's another story.) So in order to make the GP's idea work, you would have to buy a controlling share in the absolute sense: more than 50%.

Of course, because of corporate raiding and management lobbying, the SEC requires that people intending hostile takeover to report their intentions publically, giving management adequate time to defend themselves. A typical defense is the use of a white knight, who agrees with management and buys enough stock to prevent a third party from buying a controlling share. With Microsoft, there would be no reason to look any further than Bill Gates.

As cool as the idea sounds, I don't think it's workable. Keep dreaming, though. Perhaps you'll think of something that is.

Re:Open source holding companies.

[mfrank]

Of course, if the majority shareholders force the company to move in a given direction for ethical instead of financial reasons, and this causes the stock price to fall, they can expect to have their ass sued to hell and back by the minority stockholders.

It'd be a lot cheaper to put in higher bids for congressmen/women. Once you have controlling interest in them, you make software patents illegal :)

Stock is a goofy thing...

[(H)elix1]

I bought SCOX a year or so ago, just so I could order paper copies of the stock certificates before they are delisted. Can't believe they are still kicking. (Paid more for the certificate than I did the stock) Framed, these make *fantastic* white elephant gifts as did the pets.com and a few other stinkers I picked up during the crash. Anyhow, you get tons of paperwork and can usually dial into the calls if you want. Did once just to hear weasel boy work his magic, but did not care enough to queue a question. Point being, I could have.

A public company can be driven by dissenters if they have enough voting shares to matter. I'm going to go out on a limb here and say Jack does not have enough to do anything more than possibly ask a question. Most companies are pretty adept at keeping the loons from causing ruckus.

Re:Stock is a goofy thing...

[Monkelectric]

I bought SCOX a year or so ago, just so I could order paper copies of the stock certificates before they are delisted.

OH man thats great. Can you still do that?

Could hurt his "integrity"

[Guppy06]

On the one hand, buying stock will give him some (small) voice at stockholders' meetings, but unless he manages to sell the stock at a loss (or gives it away), he's still going to make a profit off of what he claims to denounce. This has the potential to be a double-edged sword.

To paraphrase Victor Kiam:

[mjtg]

"I hated it so much, I bought the company. And fired the bastards."

Re:PROFIT!

[Anonymous Coward]

you aren't funny, go away.

  ever wonder why all your posts are modded -1?

Take Two...Words

[th3space]

Assssssssss Hoooooooole.

Re:PROFIT!

[pl1ght]

At least hes not hiding behind the cowardice of the Anonymous Poster

Me too!

[Anonymous Coward]

I wish to learn more about your ideas for generating income through litigation. Please add me to your mailinglist.

Best regards,
Darl McBride.

hiding in plain sight

[Lord_of_the_nerf]

Let's leave poor Jack alone.

I bet he shows up to the first meeting with a fake moustache and dark glasses. Our delusional friend probably thinks he's going undercover.

A Shareholder Derivate Lawsuit

[Anonymous Coward]

This may be a precursor to file a shareholder's derivative lawsuit: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Derivative_suit.

remember "Roger and Me"?

[Anonymous Coward]

He's gearing up for an awkward moment at the shareholder meeting where the CEO of the company will completely ignore him. Then he'll take a trip around the country visiting the victims of game violence and asking for their opinion.
Finally the conservatives will have their Michael Moore.

Re:remember "Roger and Me"?

[bobdotorg]

Finally the conservatives will have their Michael Moore.

Not quite. Thompson is a minimum of three award winning movies and four thousand doughnuts away from being another Moore.

Re:remember "Roger and Me"?

[NightDragon]

Ugh, i as a conservative, HATE jack thompson. Im a republican and a conservative and belive me, he does NOT speak for me Remember boys and girls, hes not spearheading a CONSERVATIVE or REPUBLICAN movement. , hes spearheading a IDIOTIC one. idiot != conservative idiot != Republican idiot Jack Thompson. QED. -ND

Re:remember "Roger and Me"?

[Anonymous Coward]

That's okay. As a liberal, I hate Michael Moore.

money

[Suppafly]

JT has purchased stock in the company in order that he might attend Take-Two's shareholder meetings and face up to the company's CEO, Paul Eibeler.

regardless, he still stands to make money from his purchase.

Attention Whore

[TubeSteak]

We need a picture (a la Fark) of Jack Thompson with the caption

"I'm An Attention Whore! Look At Meeeeee!!!"

Re:Attention Whore

[mkw87]

Is this what you wanted?

Re:Attention Whore

[TubeSteak]

hahahahahaha

He's not doing a handstand while wearing a bikini, but that'll do.

Re:Attention Whore

[MasamuneXGP]

Ask, and you shall receive.
http://img479.imageshack.us/my.php?image=attention whore27tz.gif

Re:Attention Whore

[TubeSteak]

You = Winner

Re:Attention Whore

[Anonymous Coward]

Wow, he's got a flattering figure. He should take off his suit more.

Or does that mean he'd have to censor himself?

Re:Attention Whore

[mschallmo]

If Jack had a fine ass like that, I'd might let him say a few words at the next shareholder meeting under the condition that he arrives in the same outfit.

Re:Attention Whore

[mikefe]

Man, I never thought he'd look like that in a bikini...

They aren't meant to, either

[Sycraft-fu]

As with all games, the primary mandidate must be fun. In this case, fun means that someone who doesn't actually know how to fly a plane can fly. That means simplifying things some. Also, there's just the simple limits of the presentation. Unlike a real flight simulator, there's no kinesthetic feedback, the room doesn't move or shake or anything. Also, in all likelyhood, the person's view is limited to a single monitor with a 90 degree viewing angle. Hell you can't even count on them having a flight stick, it might be keyboard only.

Given all that, there are plenty of tradeoffs made with commercial flight sim games. While some are things you can change based on realism settings, it'll never by fully realistic because it's not meant to be, and isn't presented in an environment that allows for it.

Next BIG Pc/Console game.

[AnXa]

Next best selling game from Take Two: "Grand Theft Thompson", where you are Jack the Thompson and trying to criminalize Console/Win/Linux/Mac/other gaming on the planet. To get to the objective you can use law suits, spam and buy stocks of the target company and many other methods like violence in stockowners meeting. You also may lift huge media scandals by using faked information and false tests. You may freely walk and life in virtual reality of Grand Theft Thompson which features latest DirectX 10 graphics and awesome spesial effects. Hardware requements for minium are: 4Ghz Dual Core Amd Athlon64, WindowsXP extended 64-bit edition and two nVidia GeForce 9900 in SLI mode and 4Gbs of DDR2. buy it! it's beautiful and just made for benchmarking your computer(s).

Ambulance Chaser

[Anonymous Coward]

I doubt Jack Thompson is really that much of a zealot at heart. More than likely, he's just racking up enough publicity so that the next time a kid shoots someone after playing UT2K6, he'll be the first person the victims will call for representation. "Did a gamer shoot someone you love? Jack Thompson will fight hard for your rights. He'll get you the money you deserve."

I believe he's even alluded to the fact that he'd like to make the video game industry the next tobacco industry. Criminal negligence can pay big time.

Schadenfreude is great, but....

[dacarr]

You know, while I think Mr. Thompson's foibles are somewhat interesting, we do understand that he is a complete fscking nutter, right?

Quotes

[Peeptophe]

"Jack Thompson to Take-Two: All your stocks are belong to us."

Paul Eibeler was quoted as saying "Someone set us up the dipshit attorney."

Obvious Answer

[TubeSteak]

why is he still walking around?

It's hard to ambush someone who varies his route to work every morning.

Also, he never steps on cracks in the sidewalk.
The man is smarter than he looks.

Lose-lose?

[Chuck Chunder]

Certainly not for Take Two if it get's whatever game they are pimping in the news again. The publicity will mean extra dollars to them.

Ultimately I suppose there may be an argument that the industry has to fear increasing regulation but I'm not sure it should worry them. We have reached a time where adults are people who have known games for their entire lives and see it as a 'traditional' form of entertainment. Even if government does add legal weight to ratings the adult market is big and only going to get bigger.

Re:Lose-lose?

[hesiod]

> We have reached a time where adults are people who have known games for their entire lives

Please note the age of most members of Congress. Their average is higher than the average population's age.

He still isn't satisfied...

[linforcer]

... after Take-Two's latest game?

( Yes, I realise The Onion's articles are a joke, which is why I'm hoping for a funny mod ;) )

am i the only one

[know1]

who thinks he may just be laughing up his sleeve at you at the same time
he's just as corrupt and interested in money as any other politician
"yes, i will fight this evil company, by buying lucrative shares in the most popular video game franchise ever. i am such a martyr"
true he is against them and a lunatic, but it's funny how he can justify buying good stock this way

mod parent up, +1 Edgar Allan Poe Reference

[Jaxoreth]

You, sir, have just made my day and my friends list.

--
In general, it is safe and legal to kill your children and their children.
    -- POSIX Programmer's Guide

Why coin a new word?

[Bueller_007]

The Japanese have had a word for this for a long time. They're called "sokaiya". Yakuza (Japanese mafia) racketeers who dig up dirt about the company (or the executive's private lives) and then buy stock, so that they can blackmail the company at shareholder meetings.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sokaiya
http://www.calbaptist.edu/dskubik/scandal.htm

Yeah right... Like he has that much power..

[Anonymous Coward]

Remind me again, just how much of a influence as a share holder does he have? Or in other words, what percentage of the company does JT own?

Not much of an example, but I bet some slashdoter's here have stock in Microsoft. Does that mean that Microsoft will bend over for them, or let every one who has stock in the company go to their meetings? Does it mean that they will listen to and implement any suggestions a open source supporter gives them? I think not.

Again, yet another PR stunt by the egotistical JT with little to no effect on the industry at all. While people don't feel the need to feed him, I sure do. Look at how much he has accomplished(jack squat), and if gamepolitics.com is any indication, just how much attention he is really given(again, jack squat!). And lets not get started on his reasoning skills(MS flight simulator = terrorist plain crashing into WTC murder-simulator!). This "lawyer" sure spends a lot of his time trolling the internet thinking that he has actually doing anything against or harming games/gamers.

Heck just look at what he has accomplished in his goals so far, nixing one CD and suing one radio station. I expect him to accomplish the same things with video games that he has accomplished with other forms of entertainment, absolutly nothing.

and the code was wrong anyway

[BitterAndDrunk]

It's up up down down left right left right B A start.

Pedantic? No. It's the combination on my luggage.

Motion to Silence

[TubeSteak]

Now that I think about it, back in the days I used to do Model U.N., Model OAS, mock state legislature, etc

the very first question I asked upon joining each organization was "can you move to have someone silenced?"

The answer is invariably yes

Any reasonable set of rules and procedures should include the ability to silence or remove some irritating S.O.B.

Counter point

[nuggz]

He is now a a shareholder, he is well within his rights as a part owner to request an adjustment in the business strategy, or to complain about the behaviour of current management.

One could argue that producing morally objectionable material such as GTA & Bully is decreasing the value of the company, and they should focus on alternate activities of greater benefit.

Unless a significant minority interest supports such a change, it likely won't go anywhere.

Re:Counter point

[Lazbien]

To counterpoint your counterpoint...

without the core product of GTA (and possibly Bully), the firm would not be realizing revenue. Now, if he were to take your proposed stance with reference to the Hot Coffee sploit, I could definitely see where there might be derivative action.

Who cares?

[east coast]

Jack will make some noise but ultimatly do nothing worthwhile or very interesting. Not much unlike the GTA games themselves.... Once you get past the swearing and brutality of the situation it becomes old fast, not unlike Jack Thompson. heh.

Maybe we can pay him enough to suggest that they put a first person mode in the next PC release of GTA.

Already set the trap for the stockholder meeting..

[Junior J. Junior III]

I bet Jack Thompson will reveal at the shareholder's meeting that that ultra-boring box stacking game that is designed not to influence kids in any way has a secret easter egg box cutter level, and then all hell will break loose in teh board room.

how blatently obviously

[Stanneh]

Buy stock in said company Get lots of media attention to said company good or bad Watch said stock soar upwards in value Profit

MSFS

[smellsofbikes]

When you land, you begin to pull back on the stick/yoke to flare, and somewhat before you get to the ground -- when you're about as high as your wingspan is wide -- the airplane behavior changes a LOT. You start floating, because of wing/ground interactions, and your descent and flare change. It becomes nonlinear, basically -- the lower you get, the stronger the ground effect is so the more you glide. In MSFS you fly, you approach, you pull the yoke, you hit the ground, you stick. Oh, yeah, that's the other thing: in a real plane if you flare wrong you'll either do a very short stall and hit the ground with one hell of a thump, or you'll bounce (and bounce and bounce and bounce) -- neither of which MSFS models. Landings are either Whump-rollout, or Whump-bounce-whump-rollout. And the most important thing is that the visuals are weird so you don't know WHEN to flare correctly. If you rely on MSFS reflexes, you're going to make some really bad landings.

Is it that Jack Thompson

[rssrss]

The Throwin' Samoan?

You assume too much

[phorm]

It's Jack we're talking about. With his uncanny ability to fly off the handle he'll be more likely seen as the large annoyance/jackass at the shareholder's meeting.

Why didn't he do this before?

[tgeller]

Honestly, the *first* thing I would have done if I had his agenda would have been to buy stock in Take Two.

Then again, I'm not crazy.

Slashdot Late

[Anonymous Coward]

The website GameCube Advanced had this story up a whole day before Joystiq, and they have far more information. Their article is at http://ds.advancedmn.com/article.php?artid=3090

By the way, this is a SMART move for Thompson.

The irony of shareholder protestors...

[NotQuiteReal]

I get all sorts of company reports, proxy voting instructions, etc...

Hopefully all of you will too when you are old enought think of retirement investing rather than the coolest set of 20-inch "dubs" or the latest hot (literally) gaming laptop.

Anyhow, for companies of any size, there are ALWAYS "whacko" shareholders who are protesting something or other, usually something environmental or labor practices in some part of the world where being "abused" a multinational corporation is better work than nothing.

I think Jack has the perfect right to protest, but I think he is barking up the wrong tree to yell at shareholders rather than "the public". The bean counters will decide if GTA, etc are worth publishing, not minority shareholders.

From my experience the shareholders have little patience for these sorts of protests.

The irony, in my estimation, is that there is more wasted paper and other resources in these efforts than is ever gained. But then again, these things are political, not practical.

Wait a minute...

[themysteryman73]

So Jack can afford to buy shares in Take Two, but he can't afford to donate $10,000 to the charity of Eibeler's choosing?

Re:Can we just stop paying attention to this nutca

[pipingguy]

Now you're confusing me. Isn't that what America is all about?

Incorrect story

[DerekLyons]

So has JT suddenly become a financial supporter of the company he's long campaigned against?

Buying stock provides no financial benefit to the company at all, except at the IPO. None. I could go out and buy a million shares of Microsoft, or Google, or SCO, or even Take Two - and the company won't see a thin dime.

Shareholder lawsuite

[ACPosterChild]

I'll bet a big reason he bought was so that he could threaten and initiate shareholder lawsuits. Things like, "if you didn't have so much violence, you'd sell more product and make the shareholders more money"; or "you lost me money by putting that x-rated sequence on the disc, and now you gotta pay". He's complete slime.

On a related note, I saw that PA was getting very close to $500K this year.