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.

[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.

[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.

[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.

[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.

[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.

makes sense

[TheScottishGuy]

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

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

[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

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

[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

[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

[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.

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?

[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.

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.

[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.

sweet

[iamdaflash]

he could present some cool game ideas!

Talk about an ugly realization

[Brento]

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

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_

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!

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!!

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

Whats that I smell?

[arkham6]

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

Hmm. Smells suspisiously like feces, too.

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.

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...

GTA has a parent company?!

[noamt]

Isn't it against their interests?

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:to make this complete

[jferris]

You mispelled Steve Ballmer...

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.

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

[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...

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.

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?

I have a new word for people like JT.

[Pantero Blanco]

The word is "litigiterrorists".

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: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.

Silly Question

[spudgun]

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

why is he still walking around ?

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.

the formula

[mrcdeckard]

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

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.

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.

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

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.

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.