Take Two Files Suit Against Jack Thompson

Bullied writes "Take Two has tired of Jack Thompson's frivolous lawsuits and has filed a federal lawsuit in the Southern District of Florida to prevent him from filing any more 'nuisance' lawsuits. 'Take Two argues that the lawsuits violate its First Amendment rights to free expression, but it also claims that the suits are so vague as to be unconstitutional. "This unconstitutional vagueness will have a chilling effect on Plaintiff as well as Plaintiff's customers," says the company. "Plaintiff's distributors likely will respond to the uncertainty and fear of penalties by withholding Plaintiff's video games from the public."' Take Two also cites the disruptive effect Thompson's suits have on its retail partners."

Comments

Can anyone fill in legal details?

[benfinkel]

What are the outcome options here? Would T2's success in this suit stop JT's current lawsuits completely? Would he be able to re-file them after the games came out? Can you be liable in Civil or Criminal Court for excessive frivolous lawsuits?

We can only hope

[EvilGoodGuy]

I really do hope Take Two can find a case here, I know I've been angered more than once by his rediculous opinions, and it would be nice to finally shut him up.

They should just pull a Viacom though, and ask for $1,000,000,000 in compensation.

Re:We can only hope

[CelticWhisper]

The problem is that in this case, upholding it is actually doing it a disservice as he attempts to stage his ideological attacks against it.

If I were to stand on a soapbox in town square and proclaim that video games are immoral and anti-christian and the spawn of the devil and blah blah blah, the alternate-universe me sitting here and reading /. would agree with you that I'm just exercising my right to free speech.

However, if I were to stand on a soapbox and say all these things about videogames being bad and blah blah blah and so let's ban them, that would be a slightly different story, as where do you draw the line between my right to free speech and/or expression and that of the video game creators? It's kind of a variant of the adage that "your right to swing your fist ends where my face begins." My right to game-bashing ends where the rights of the creators begin. Same with Thompson.

Still, kudos to you for keeping perspective and realizing that yes, there is some greater good in being offended. We need more folks like you who are actually able to grow thicker skin and realize that life entails being offended sometimes.

Re:gtaIV

[phorm]

That might be pushing it a bit, but how about making a lawyer-type character with a penchant for chasing ambulances?

Maybe a side-quest could be to steal an ambulance and make it to "target X" before the lawyer manages to catch up to you, or perhaps to reach X ambulances and/or eliminate the lawyer before he reaches them.

Re:What took so long?

[Clever7Devil]

His litigation record is laughable, but have you seen his correspondence?

Some of the published letters between Jack and members of the gaming community are purely ridiculous.

I'm sure someone has linked Penny-Arcade already, but have you read this one?

http://www.grumpygamer.biz/index.php/2006/09/23/ja ck_thompson_thinks_he_s_jesus/

Re:Why is he still practicing law?

[MMaestro]

Harassment, improper behavior, mis-representation as an officer of the court. All serious grounds for a lawyer, especially since hes been doing this YEARS. He's already been reprimanded by the Florida Bar Association and a judge for his behavior in court. Sooner or later, hes gonna push his luck too far and a judge will either throw him out of court (effectively ending his career since no one wants a lawyer who can't keep his cool) or he'll lose his license as a lawyer. If senators can't get legislation passed against "violent" video games, Jack Thompson is simply going to be destroyed by the courts when push comes to shove.