Miami Court Orders Take Two to Hand Over Bully
Jabrwock writes "GamePolitics.com reports that a judge in Miami ruled that Take Two Interactive, makers of the controversial title Bully, must hand over a copy of the soon to be released game to the court within 24 hours. Jack Thompson, the plaintiff, called the ruling a 'huge victory against the violent video game industry', although Take Two can still appeal the order. Thompson filed a lawsuit asking the court to label Bully a 'public nuisance' and restrict its October 17 release in Florida."
You won't stop until someone who's played GTA actually kills you, will you?
Honestly, we all want you to die not because we're violent, sadistic bastards, but because you just won't stop wasting our tax dollars on this horse-shit.
than uninformed asshats with a cause all in the name of "saving the children."
/me loves me some video games...
Why not protest the war or lack of education funding in the more poorer districts? I think children need more, oh I dunno, text books and trained staff than they need protection from "the boogie woogies" of video games...
Oh right, cuz the guy is a press whore no-talent assclown who just wants to be known as the biggest loser in the world.
Tom
Someday, I'll have a real sig.
Given the average intelligence of the people assosiated with Jack Thompson and his anti-videogame 'movement', I doubt any of them are smart enough to actualy get the computer game installed and running, much less have the skill to get past even the first stages of the game.
And what good is him having an advance copy going to do anyone, other than the fact that he will have a few extra words to the rants he's been making about the game from day 1. Heck, I didn't even know about the game until I heard him blabbing about it. Maybe he should realize that he's just turned into free advertising for the game and shut up?
Nahh, that would be too mature a move for him. He's content to make a fool out of himself, again.
I don't just mean it reaches a bad result. This really is just bad law as well as bad policy.
A fundamental bedrock of first ammendment jurisprudence is the principle of no prior restraint. Sure the court has unfortunatly carved some exceptions where individuals might be fined or even prosecuted for the content of their work (obscene material with no redeming literary/scientific value) but it has universally struck down anything that even smacks of prior restraint. Obviously any damages can be sought after the game is released and the only reason to submit it now is to achieve something like judicial approval for their game. Such an action flies in the face of long established first ammendment jurisprudence.
I suspect Thompson just found a sympathetic local judge who either didn't know or didn't like the clear first ammendment case law on prior restraint. Then again maybe the publishers didn't protest too loudly knowing they could have it reversed on appeal and it would get them great publicity. In either case I don't doubt that this will quickly be reversed.
If you liked this thought maybe you would find my blog nice too:
Maybe it is just me? It's the "think of the children" crowd who are a public nuisance.
I think it shows a large amount of disrespect toward parents (and adult gamers) all over to have a Judge/Plaintiff deciding what is good or bad for the public when it comes to video games or art or entertainment.
Last time I checked the First Amendment was still in the constitution. How is a video game a public nuisance, whatever that means, and subject to extraordinary examination that would never pass constitutional muster if applied to a book or movie?
Thompson is bringing a claim to the court that the game constitutes a menace. Since the game isn't actually out yet, the judge has no way to proceed with this claim until he sees the product. I fully anticipate he'll view it for a few days, take a few days of consultation, and then reach a sumary judgement for the defendants. You'll be hard pressed to find a judge willing to prohibit free speech or free commerce of this kind. Blocking the sale of a legal commerical product won't pass much constitutional scrutiny and would be thrown out in an instant by a higher court.
This is just Jack Thompson wanting attention for his upcoming book (hell, he called his co-author as a witness). Giving him attention is letting him win.
It's not stupid. It's advanced.
IANAL...
If I were Take Two, my FIRST piece of evidence in defending my wares would be America's Army. "Hey it isn't just us making games that are violent. The very same government asked to pass judgement against us gives this shit away!"
AA is designed to be as accurate as possible with regard to teaching people proper technique for assault, infiltration and causing strategic mayhem. All supported by our tax dollars. If the government is freely supplying this material to people, how the fuck can they ban it? Is this fucking insane or am I missing something?
No sig for you!!
What blows my mind is that this is the guy who suggested that someone should make a game where the president of Take 2 Interactive and her family are killed... and then blew off the $10,000 he offered should someone make that game. Where the **** does he get the moral authority, let alone professional authority -- I mean, he's a lawyer, and knows about the game industry only in an academic sense, and I say that using the loosest definition of academic possible -- to judge whether Bully is acceptable. He's a God fearing man. Would it be so bad for God to drop an anvil on him?
Regards, Ian
Since when can some random uninvolved third party with no standing sue to see an unreleased product? Is the judge JT's drinking buddy or just completely out of his mind?
Does this ruling actually affect sales of the game, or is it just to let the judge play the game himself and see if it's actually as bad as Thompson claims?
Judge says he wants to see 100 hours of game play. Thing is - there isn't much more time than that between the handover deadline and the game's release...
Running Windows^H^H^H^H^H^H^H OSX and Linux in the home. (I don't have time for Solitaire any more.)
If Jack Thompson was right, he'd be dead.
The Kruger Dunning explains most post on
Take Two lost millions due to the Hot Coffee mod (repackaging cost, recall cost, lost sales, etc).
Not all publicity is good.
I would never have heard of this game had not Jack Thompson thrown up such a huff. Now, I want to play it.
"Let's see... we'll just ban these books and NO ONE will ever want to read them... right?"
This is an interlocutory order. TakeTwo can't appeal this order forcing them to turn over the game. If TakeTwo loses the full trial, then they can appeal and claim that the order should have never been issued. It's a civil proceudure rule.
That aside, I'm not surprised. Most state judges have little concept of the first amendment. Even if they lose at the trial level, they will almost certainly prevail on appeal. Video games are protected as expression just like speech, books, and flag burning. All this will do is stir up a media shitstorm, you'll see a bunch of Tipper Gore wannabes out whining about "saving the children," from violence, and then we'll go back to executing criminals, engaging in war, and watching Sunday afternoon football. God Bless America.
Funny how Jack's tried in the past over a school-shooting to get $33-mil for damages because the kid who did the shooting played "Violent" video games such as Final Fantasy, had a copy of The Basketball Diaries, and accessed porn sites. Parents no where to be found? I'm rather sick of this guy.
Where were the parents when these kids get the games, obtains movies, and accesses the porn sites? Jacky-boy. Put the blame where it is due. I have no problems with my kid and porn or video games because I monitor what he does on the computer, consoles, and DVD-player, and I'll be damned if some born-again Christian thinks he can control how I control my kid.
Some kid shoots people and you try to get the kids parents $33-million? Idiot...
...must hand over a copy of the soon to be released game to the court within 24 hours.
Well, it beats driving to Best Buy, and is a heck of a lot faster than Amazon...
Thought they couldn't stop you but could only react afterwards.
Interesting that they are doing this to a video game- not sure it will be constitutional.
"We want you to provide copies of your newspaper daily before you go to press so we can approve or disapprove it."
She was like chocolate when she drank... semi-sweet at first and then increasingly bitter.
Judge: I can't really rule without seeing the game.
Rockstar: We've got nothing to hide, want to see it?
Judge: Sure, that'd help.
Jack Thompson Self Serving Press Release: Hah! Because of MY great lawsuit, the judge ORDERED Rockstar to produce their evil game!!
Gullible Press: "Judge orders Rockstar to produce game!"
Slashdot: "fascist jugde orders rockstar to prodce game!"
The cake is a pie
Rockstar is clearly thinking these issues through ahead of time, creating weapons for the legal battles. But then, what else would you expect from a company that could sucessfully release an update to pong! If only the Southpark guys would take on Jack ...
Socialism: a lie told by totalitarians and believed by fools.
This is an interlocutory order. TakeTwo can't appeal this order forcing them to turn over the game. If TakeTwo loses the full trial, then they can appeal and claim that the order should have never been issued. It's a civil proceudure rule.
Yes. But why let the technical details stand in the way of a provocative message? The war that both sides are fighting is not localized to this event.
That aside, I'm not surprised. Most state judges have little concept of the first amendment.
Not this one, otherwise Jack Thompson would have been allowed to enjoin Rockstar from releasing the game much earlier in this proceeding without as much evidence gathering.
Even if they lose at the trial level, they will almost certainly prevail on appeal. Video games are protected as expression just like speech, books, and flag burning. All this will do is stir up a media shitstorm, you'll see a bunch of Tipper Gore wannabes out whining about "saving the children," from violence, and then we'll go back to executing criminals, engaging in war, and watching Sunday afternoon football. God Bless America.
Sadly, I think you fail to describe the edge case.
There are 1.1... kinds of people.
Leave it to Florida to stomp on the 1st Amendment at all times.
Can we get a lawsuit going to ban the Bible down there? It's full of rape and murder, and I think the youth of the world should be protected from it.