Slashdot Mirror
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.""
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
whois gawk date unzip strip find touch finger mount join nice man top fsck grep eject more yes exit umount sleep dump
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?
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.
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.
"Trolls they were, but filled with the evil will of their master: a fell race..." -- J.R.R. Tolkien on Olog-hai
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.
8 .html
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/20051019-545
My MythTV HowTo
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.
You have enemies? Good. That means you've stood up for something, sometime in your life. --Winston Churchill
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.
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.
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.
+++ UGUCAUCGUAUUUCU
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.
I don't let my children play them (ages 6, 3, and 1), and reserve those for my own use.
...he's shown himself to be in the worst light of those who would deny any human joy for fear of corruption.
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.
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...
https://www.eff.org/https-everywhere
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.
I'll never make that mistake again, reading the experts' opinions. - Feynman
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.
It's been a few years... thank heavens sun keeps copies of their proxy statements on their site:t s/proxy_statement_03.pdf (page 34 and 35)
http://www.sun.com/aboutsun/investor/annual_repor
Note especially that the board recommended that we vote against it... which a majority did... then I sold my shares.
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.
Hunt your preferred prey at Aliens vs Predator MUD. Join the war at avpmud.com port 4000