Slashdot Mirror
Judge Clears Bully For Publishing
stupid_is writes "The BBC are reporting that Judge Ronald Friedman has cleared Bully for publication in Florida. Jack Thompson is, predictably, critical of the decision, stating "You did not see the game, you don't even know what it was you saw." after Take-Two gave him the game, along with someone to play the game for him to watch before he made a decision." This is a follow-up to our story last week about Take-Two handing over copies of Bully per court order.
"There's a lot of violence," Judge Friedman said. "A whole lot. Less than we see on television every night."
It's nice to see that a judge is actually comparing this to the other media that we're exposed to out here in the real world.
This guy's the limit!
''You did not see the game,'' Mr Thompson told the judge at Friday's hearing. "You don't even know what it was you saw."
Unless I missed something, Thompson hasn't seen the game since it's unreleased and is criticising the judge who did see it. Amazing.
I'm starting to think that this guy is a clever guerilla marketer who brings attention and boosted sales to his clients via the media and legal system. Just look how well 2 Live Crew sold records after a protracted legal battle waged by Jack Thompson.
Where does the school board find them and why do they keep sending them to ME?
Jack Thompson is special. He's found that if the Florida Bar takes disciplinary action against him, he can simply sue them and they'll roll over onto their backs, whimper, and pay him twenty grand or so.
I suspect he can be disbarred in any state where he practices pro hac vice, but I doubt other states bars will even want to hear it. And this case was in Florida anyway.
Done with slashdot, done with nerds, getting a life.
We already know he's got his head up his ass, so with his feet stuck in his mouth, which is part of his head, which is up his ass..... damn, that's getting right convoluted!
Q: What do you get when you cross Ouroborous with a Klein Bottle?
A: Jack Thompson, the only man who can simultaneously put his feet in his mouth when he's already got his head up his ass.
This Bully issue is interesting because it highlights the salient point so often missed by those who criticise violence in entertainment: context. To a thinking person, it is obvious that entertainment involving beating a schoolmate bloody with a bat is more disturbing than entertainment involving a bodybuilder blowing up aliens with a bazooka, despite the fact that - objectively at least - murder is worse than assault. The context being so much closer to home - a kid with a bat is much nearer to actual reality than a bodybuilder blowing up aliens - is where the disturbance factor comes in, and it's pretty much impossible to quantify closeness-to-home realism which makes it a challenge for the courts.
A-Bomb
well, i doubt real bullies would play this game anyways, since the objective is defeat bullies, not be one.
if anything, the game has the potential to have a strong message of empowerment for all those kids who spend recess stuffed into lockers.
2 1337 4 u!
Thompson's criticism also presumes that the judge merely sat passively and watched. Who's to say he wasn't sitting there telling the player "Hey, that kid with the glasses! Punch him! Again! Kick him! Take his lunch money! YEAAAH!"
Just junk food for thought...
Honestly?
You are all a bunch of idots.
Despite the fervent wishes of certain unbalanced extremists, prior restraint in publishing is not recognized in US law, except in cases of national security, and only then when circumstances are extraordinary. Right to publish is automatic. Thus, the Judge did not "clear" anything for publishing, as judges do not have that right in this country.
A less misleading headline might be, "Judge Refuses to Block Publication of 'Bully'", or, "No Reason to Block Take-Two's 'Bully', says Judge", or,"Take-Two's 'Bully' No Threat to National Security".
Schwab
Editor, A1-AAA AmeriCaptions
This case involves Jack Thompson and a judge that thus far has demonstrated his ability to act fairly. Despite Jack's reputation himself as an annoyance, the Judge agreed to actually look at the game before making a decision. Then, upon seeing it, he drew parallels to existing societal norms. So far these are the actions of a rational man; and they're just what we know from a news article.
I know what happens when you assume, but in this case I am going to go out on a limb here and suggest that if Judge Friedman felt he was being decieved, he would have stated so. If I may as well, I'll take the leap that if Jack felt Judge Friedman was being decieved, he would have no problems fufilling his obligation to the court to say so. In short, with lack of evidence to the contrary, and no history of foolish behavior in this case on the part of Judge Friedman -- I am going say that Judge Friedman did his job, and its judicial armchair quarterbacking on your part to think otherwise because a news article did not detail every step of the trial to your satisfaction.
~Rebecca (IANAL, but damn this is my second law related post today)
The glorius courts of the Motherland have done their work and examined the game in question and approved it for the new communist man. In response, the Central Committee has increased the vodka ration to two bottles a month in celebration of this great triumph! Once again the Motherland supports your right to freedom by ensuring that only the best books, magazines, movies and games are available to the mindless sheep tireless workers of the revolution.
I wish people would read: http://www.lectlaw.com/files/cur78.htm (or one of another billions sources or the actual case files) before always mentioning "the coffee case." I am studying to be a lawyer and 9 out of 10 people who reference a case have never read the case, the facts, or otherwise, but still are "horrified" at the results. I was speaking with a Federal Judge yesturday and he told me how people constantly come up to him and call him and activist judge for his decision in XYZ case, but when asked if they've read the case they more than 90% of the time will say no, but they heard about it on the news.
I know this is Slashdot and no one reads that article, but please at least read the points of your post(s), because you only spread more FUD or at the very least misinformation.
Cheers,
TdC
Mr Thompson criticised the decision to have an employee take him through the game, arguing he could have avoided making violent choices.
I think this is the most telling of Mr Thompson's state of mind.
He may not have realized it, but he just defeated his entire standpoint against any videogame. What he says is completely true about games, and about life in general. Yes, kids *can* do violent things, but it's up to the individual to "avoid making violent choices" in video games and in life. It is the responsibility of the parents to teach their kids how to deal with frustrating situations, and to be the prime example.
Mr. Thompson is really setting a bad example to the very kids he's trying to protect. Avoiding "making violent choices" involves restraint. But him lashing out at everyone and everything, using his lawyer status as a tool to frighten others not as knowledgable in law to do what he wants done, is sending the opposite message.
Pretty good reading, if you'd like to get a better sense at just how crazy JT really is:
o n-verbally-attacks-judge-207578.php
http://www.kotaku.com/gaming/jack-thompson/thomps
if anything, the game has the potential to have a strong message of empowerment for all those kids who spend recess stuffed into lockers.
Well, once they come out with the PSP version.