Slashdot Mirror
Jack Thompson Gearing Up For GTA IV Fight
Next Generation reports on Jack Thompson's next big fight: Grand Theft Auto IV. A mass email was sent to news organizations entitled 'Bill Gates in the Crosshairs'. He vows to 'rally the troops' against the release of the next chapter in Rockstar's sandbox-style crime series. The game is due out sometime this year, on both the Xbox 360 and PlayStation 3. From the article: "Thompson said that he would 'undertake various means to prohibit' the sale of GTA IV to minors, and added, 'Please have your lawyers [Microsoft chairman Bill Gates', that is] contact me in order that such sales will be prevented.' He also said that the ICCR report 'makes it abundantly clear that unless such prohibitions are in place, then millions of units of the new Grand Theft Auto game will be sold directly to minors.' He continued, 'I am quite intent upon making sure that that does not happen. I and others will endeavor to stop Microsoft from participating in any fashion, directly or indirectly, in such sales to minors.'"
This is the good side of what JT does.
If only he'd stick to keeping kids from buying adult games, the world would have no beef with him.
I'm Jack T and no one has heard from me recently! I'm lonely and there are wolves...
Please, O Lord:
Bring the mighty weight of Microsoft's legal staff to bear upon Jack Thompson, and allow us to watch him disappear in a four-colored puff of smoke.
Amen.
You can't talk about Wikipedia's flaws on Wikipedia
I sorta like the idea of Bill Gates as in insidious mischief lover, selling lewd video game content to minors in the form of XBox games he hides under his trench coat.
Doesn't he realize he'd feel so much better if he just went a beat up a hooker or two?
No, it's not a good point at all because Jack is going after the wrong end of the chain. Why is he contacting MS? First off, MS isn't developing or publishing GTA4. He should be after the retail stores since they are the ones responsible for selling 'M' and 'AO' games to children. He should also be be imploring parents to pay attention to game ratings and to make use of the parental control features that are on all the current consoles. MS has NOTHING to do with mature games getting into the hands od kids.
At what point do JT's repeated and unsuccessful lawsuits become illegal themselves? Is it legal to sue over the same issue over and over and over and over and over again...?
How about the label: If you buy this for your kids, you are a douchebag and a bad parent.
If people would spend even 5 minutes understanding the ESRB, all these problems would go away. People understand R rated movied, why can't they understand M rated games? Jack Thompson should just get people to learn more about the ESRB, but I don't see how he can get paid doing that. heh
Gonzo Granzeau
"Nothing the god of biomechanics wouldn't let you into heaven for.." -Roy Batty
I was pleasantly surprised to see a few things over this holiday season.
Parents asking about the rating system and what it means.
Game retailers pausing the transaction to point out it is a 17+/mature rated title and may not be appropriate for children.
I don't see anything wrong with carding younger customers (which I've seen). The problem is the outright bans some people want to have, or those who angrily react when someone suggests they make an informed decision.
They are no more adult than R movies. That's what M is equivalent to in terms of movie ratings. The adults rating, or NC-17 equivalent, is AO. However because most retailer refuse to carry games with AO ratings, even in a separate section, few are made. Same deal with movies. That's why there's an "Unrated" American Pie. Basically what happened is in the original cut, the MPAA hung an NC-17 on it which most theatres won't carry. So they made the necessary changes to bring it down to R. When they released the original cut, they simply didn't submit it for rating, and thus sell it as "Unrated".
Either way unless you also think R movies should be off in a separate section then it doesn't make sense to move M games there. Not that it matters much, retailers these days card you. Seriously, I got carded buying FEAR last month (I'm 26) at Target.
He's facing possible disbarment over the Bully incident where the publicly berated the judge in the case. I wonder if he'll still be able to practice law when GTA4 comes out.
First, I can say, I don't think there's a specific 'law', so to speak, but there is a common policy and campaign for the exact thing. Most stores will show employees a video and have signs that say "under 2x, we card", kind of thing.
Second, adults care a lot about being carded when they're obviously old. Speaking from experience as both a cashier, manager, and customer, I've seen some adults get very verbally abusive on some poor high school girl who asked for id, some to the point where you fear a physical confrontation. While there's a lot of others (probably a minority though) will often complain and even complain to management about being carded.
It's simply not true that 'adults' don't care. There are plenty of people out there who feel they've somehow earned their due to quickly purchase restricted items without hassle. Kind of like getting asked to show your receipt when leaving a Best Buy or something. It just annoys a lot of people. Ironically enough, when someone does turn 21 (in the US for alcohol), they want to be carded as some sort of right-of-passage... but the novelty soon wears off.
Cheers,
Fozzy
"The past was erased, the erasure was forgotten, the lie became truth." ~1984 George Orwell
As an adult, I do have a problem with being asked for ID. I have gray hair and I'm obviously older than the little fucks asking for my ID. It's a power-trip for minimum-wage clerks.... "Sir, the law REQUIRES me to card you for appearing to be under the age of 60...."
What I usually do is demand ID from clerks in those situations, because I've run into clerks who look too young to be SELLING liquor asking me for ID.
But seriously, "appearing to be under 60." How stupid is that.... Welcome aboard the slippery slope, my friend! Some municipalities in the U.S. now require clerks to ask for identification for anybody appearing to be under the age of 60! Used to be 40, but some fucking do-gooder somewhere probably saw a special on High-Schoolers with beards that he thought looked "40". And as we all know, the worst thing that can happen to a kid is if a sip of beer crosses his lips before his 21st birthday...
Some (even more ridiculously) require TWO forms of identification for liquor purchase. And yes, you do occasionally get the one arsehole clerk on his first day who makes the senior citizen in line ahead of you at the grocery dig out two forms of ID to buy his one friggin' bottle of wine... Wasting minutes of your life that you'll never get back watching the guy dig for his second id, then argue that he was fighting in wars while the clerk was still a horny impulse in somebody's eye... Meanwhile, the minors with the requisite "real-looking" two fake IDs walk out unmolested.
Laws like this are an idiotic over-reaction... Carding people who look underage is logical. REQUIRING people to ask for identification from all customers appearing to be under 60 is not only foolish and inefficient, but also ineffective. Minors attempting to buy liquor are generally doing so with FAKE IDs, or through straw-buyers. These rules don't stop those purchases--the only people it stops from buying booze are minors with poor-quality fake-IDs, and adults who don't have a drivers license handy at the counter.
Who did what now?
The main issue I have with him is not the fact that he doesn't like video games or violence, it's that he JUST PLAIN OUTRIGHT LIES - he does not get the facts, he does not get the scoops, he doesn't know things we don't know - he simply assumes!
"It's called bully, it must be bad!"
"It's GTAIV from Rockstar, it MUST be bad!"
None of us at all know a single damn thing about GTAIV - it's a mystery thus far and he's already started?
I wish this foolish, stupid little man would go away soon.
And big fucks like you are the reason my girlfriend hates her job! Here's a newsflash, asshole: those clerks really are required by law to ID you! In fact, in my state it's required regardless of age -- she even has to ask 80-year-old geezers, because she'd get fired if she didn't.
Tell you what, why don't you post your name and address, so I can come beat the shit out of you for abusing people like my girlfriend, who are only trying to do their jobs! How would you like that, hmm?
"[Regarding the 'cloud,'] ownership was what made America different than Russia." -- Woz
In my state, clerks are required to show their liquor license and proof of age on demand by customers... Liquor sellers are LICENSED here--you don't just get a job at a liquor store... You get a job, then get a license, and THEN you can work. One of the stipulations of that license is that it be presented on demand of a customer. I'm within my legal rights (its "the law") to demand her ID--but I don't see you lining up to defend MY rights... Maybe you should offer to beat up all the clerks who balk at being asked to present their legally required license and identification... After all, if I bought liquor from somebody underage I would be breaking the law too! (Yeah, that law sucks too.) Seems like rank hypocrisy to me... And before you ask, yes, I have communicated my displeasure with the liquor laws to my state representative/state senator.
I know that when I worked at the liquor store, I checked ID for people who looked underage and I can confidently tell you I never sold to any minors--the "law" was that I had to check everybody, but everybody including the Excise Police knew that we weren't checking everybody--through the use of something called common-sense (that your generation may not be familiar with) we managed to achieve a balance between a law written in a vacuum and the legitimate interest of the community to restrict minors' access to booze.
Your girlfriend needs to quit her job if she doesn't like it. Working at a liquor store sucks, (I know, I've done it)--My guess is she'd find one of the various other flaws in the work to hate if that law went away tomorrow. Reality is: Adults don't like being denied access to something they are LEGALLY ENTITLED TO PURCHASE, especially when the gatekeeper doesn't even look legal to vote... and DOUBLE especially when I'm old enough to be the girl's father.
Also, word to the wise on challenging somebody to fight... It isn't wise (or impressive) to challenge men you've never met to fisticuffs online... The fact that you did so publicly illustrates what an empty threat you're making. And it further underlines your cowardice... If you were serious about settling this between you and I, you would have used my email address in my Slashdot profile and named your time and place, instead of trying to post it publicly and "look tough." Go home and whine to your girlfriend about your minimum-wage customer service jobs... But a better use of your energy would be to learn some skills to get better jobs.
To the specifics of your threat: 1) You don't want my address--undesired/unexpected visitors here get a really unpleasant greeting at the end of my HK. 2) You are a hypocrite and coward, grow up and realize that customer service jobs suck in and of themselves, not because I don't want my time wasted while people on Social Security prove they're old enough to buy a 6-pack. 3) If you really want to challenge somebody to fight, send them a private message. Anything else just looks like bluster. You've got my email--it's in my slashdot profile...
Who did what now?
Who's bankrolling Jack? I mean, his results haven't exactly been stellar thus far...has he had any successes? So who's paying for all this legal maneuvering?