Slashdot Mirror
Surprisingly Few People Collect On GTA Hot Coffee
Relin writes "Out of the millions eligible, less than 3,000 have come forward to collect their money in the 'Hot Coffee' settlement. While the plaintiffs' lawyer is surprised by the development, Theodore Frank of the Legal Center for the Public Interest at the American Enterprise Institute seems convinced that the lawsuit was 'meritless' and will result in no payment for the legal counsel opposing Take-Two."
It's $5
Anonymous Coward
"Seth Lesser, lead lawyer for the plaintiffs said that he is "disappointed" by the outcome, and doesn't understand why so many people don't care."
It is, after all, just a video game.
I've got your sig, right here.
American Enterprise Institute seems convinced that the lawsuit was "meritless" and will result in no payment for the legal counsel opposing Take-Two.
Oh boy, I can only hope. Oh please.
The time it would take filling out the forms and cashing the $5 check is better spent on something else.
And frankly, anyone who buys Grand Theft Auto, the game that lets you kill hookers instead of paying them, is going to be hard to offend with some sex scene they have to use a hack to see in the first place.
That lawsuit never should have been brought to court, I hope the laywers don't see a penny!
Being that it requited a hack to unlock the feature (aka censors already deemed the code unacceptable) and the kids who downloaded the hack could have just as easily have gotten real porn. It really isn't that big of a deal. Besides who wants to say after buying GTA I am such a prude that I want money to accommodate my suffering. I think most people will say they hypocrisy needs to stop at some point.
If something is so important that you feel the need to post it on the internet... It probably isn't that important.
So it might just turn out that all that moral outrage and mass hysteria was just a ruse brought up to try and cash in on a game franchise.
Everybody now: "YA THINK!?!"
TFA states that the attorneys that brought the case are demanding 1.3 million in legal fees, way more than the 2,676 * (max $35) = $93,660 settlement fees that Take Two will have to pay.
Perhaps the remaining millions who did not claim the money actually, you know, liked the game?
I don't think it would make sense for gamers to exploit a frivolous lawsuit to get a few dollars out of a company that made a game they enjoyed.
I wonder what the networth of the attention take 2 got from this is worth. Surely far more than the cost of paying out the penalty and the fees of the lawers that they probably have on full time retainer anyhow.
I Need someone to rebuild a Digitech Digital Delay pedal for me....for me...for me...for me.
Suppose I bought some porn video and there was a code that my kids found that let them play a game where they beat people and ran them over for fun. Would I have case?
Who exactly is supposed to care about this?
-Dave
"I read instructions on the Internet on how to mod GTA so that I could see a sex scene, and when I followed those instructions, the game actually let me see a sex scene! Now I feel surprised, shocked and offended and want $5!"
Sometimes I really wonder if there are any normal people left in this world.
If the GTA makers owe me $35 for their hidden NPC sex scene, then the Second Life makers owe me seven figures for emotional trauma from the brief virtual walk I took though the general area.
and I still want my money!
Engineering is the art of compromise.
are the lawyers. The lawyers don't care if everyone get pennies, because they get their millions. And if there is a settlement or verdict, it should always be in monetary form distributed automatically to every class member. Members shouldn't have to fill any paperwork. The corporations should calculate it for them. Two examples:
1. Bank of America privacy lawsuit.
Fees waived for deposited items getting returned!
Fees returned for calling customer service!
12 months free subscription to a credit card protection service (a $30 value)!
90 free days of Privacy Assist Identity Theft Protection Service (a $17.85 value)!
Hell no. Basically, they get free marketing. OUCH.
2. Visa MasterCard Discovery Currency lawsuit.
They want you to calculate your foreign purchases yourself and document them for your reimbursement. Hell no. They should pay us $400/hr as they do their lawyers for the time we spend sorting through years worth of credit card statements. Some companies even charge a fee for requesting older records.
Settling should not be an option for class action lawsuits. The client/s should decide whether to settle, not the lawyer/s. A settlement should always be an opt-in, not an opt-out.
Maybe this vocal minority is smaller than believed? Meanwhile, the rest of us are able to distinguish fantasy and reality, do not find the former offensive, and would prefer seeing naked human bodies engaged in sex acts rather than human bodies being brutally blown apart.
had Joe Pesci, these stupid lawyers against Take-Two and a big, fat baseball bat....
I'm a GTA San Andreas player who was not at all interested in money from Take Two because of the Hot Coffee content in the game. I'm not surprised that only a handful of people have taken them up on it, the game is limited to sale to a 17+ audience, an audience that already knows (except in the states whos names start and end with a vowel) that people have sex.
I *DO* however wonder how many of those 3,000 people were really offended by the Hot Coffee content, and how many were just going "Cool, free money!"
The Hot Coffee patch reminds me of ROT-13 encryption. It's trivial for someone to get at the content if they want to, but you have to deliberately go after it. You can't "accidentally" see it. You're saying "I know this might offend me, and I want to see it anyway".
We sadly live in a culture where it's more acceptable to beat up or kill a woman than it is to have sex with her. Which explains a lot of unfortunate things. It doesn't make them right though.
You want to know what is really offensive? And I don't think I'm alone here... I find it particularly offensive that someone would sue over this. And win.
I had so much hope for our species.
Sean
There are plenty of ladders available for less than $25. Does it cost a negative amount to manufacture and ship the things? I doubt it.
Actually a little reading/education will go a long ways in this discussion. The suit vs. McDonald's was legitimate though the jury-awarded amount was a bit extreme. Do some research and you'll see why she lost the lawsuit. (Hint: 700+ prior cases of injury, third degree burns requiring skin grafts and stuff, the judge lowered the punitive damages to less than $500,000 USD, and the elderly lady who was burned was burned a second time when the corporation didn't want to pay only her medical bills and they became the first and only people that she sued.) I realize that people love to point to that particular lawsuit and make fun of it but the reality is a lot different than most people are aware. Her suit was legitimate.
"So long and thanks for all the fish."
I live in the GTA. Where do I get my free coffee?
When our name is on the back of your car, we're behind you all the way!
This doesn't apply to any versions of the game sold outside of the US, correct?
If each mistake being made is a new one, then progress is being made.
It's estimated that ladders cost $25 more than they should because of the tort tax.
Heck, look at the price difference between a drug marketed for humans and the same drug, made in the same facility, put in the same bottle, just labeled for animals - a lot of the price difference is the tort cost.
Generics don't have to worry as much, as do drugs that have been out for a long time.
I think that they should put a $50 or so deductible on cases like this - per person. Sure, it'd encourage some companies to try to screw every customer out of $50. But, I wouldn't have the deductible count in small claims court(IE not brought by big lawyer firm), or in cases where people were pursuing independent action. Of course, under $50, most people would be in small claims anyways.
But I tend to dislike the cases where they claim some company screwed people out of money or whatever without them knowing. When I bought some money from crucial - then later received paperwork from some lawyer firm for a class action, I didn't bother pursuing it - because I had paid what I felt was a fair price.
I don't read AC A human right
Reminds me of Duke Nukem were all the sex scenes were cut out but could be activated by typing in a code word. Here is a game were you can blow peoples heads off and swear but oooh no, boobies are not allowed.......sheesh
Could we send in $5 to enable the hot coffee mod?
I've never seen so much consensus in Slashdot comments! And you're all right - the fact that gratuitous violence is more acceptable than sex is sick, sick, sick.
All pass beyond reach of medicine. None pass beyond the reach of love.
The suit was not legitimate. If it were, do you think companies today would still be serving coffee at the same scalding temperature? No, they would not.
I have looked into this case a lot and I once shared your view. Check out overlawyered.com if you genuinely want more insight. http://overlawyered.com/2005/10/urban-legends-and-stella-liebeck-and-the-mcdonalds-coffee-case/ It is alluring to think the common sense answer is wrong but in this case it is not. Keep in mind that trial lawyers have a vested interest in making you think this case was legit.
Thanks for your time.
I bought a version that didn't have the sex scene. Can I collect $5 from the people that made them cut it out?
Democracy Now! - your daily, uncensored, corporate-free
Lawsuits are more about money, especially for the lawyers, rather than defending public rights.
Are you high? *sighs* I'll go on, I'd figured it'd be obvious. It isn't to you so I'll help you along. M'Kay? *grins* (Forgive my attitude - I'm slightly intoxicated at this point.) McDonald's had served coffee at a temperature that was much hotter than the average at that time. McDonald's had known of prior injuries. The corporation had willfully declined to warn customers. (I'd have said the suit was bogus with just a warning - just a warning, but they did not.)
This, in and of itself, is enough for me. The damages done were nothing less than willful negligence. (Yes, I even read your link.)
I'll leave you with this... Some searching, effort if you'd like, will show that I (of all the people on the planet) am not a leftist nor do I typically ascribe to anything the gibberish monkeys put out from either extremist views. That being said, they reason it was legitimate was because they knew that people were stupid enough to keep getting burned and didn't even warn them. I would argue that we don't need a nanny state where people are constantly protected from their own stupidity BUT when coffee burns result in third degree burns and the company knew this but opted to not warn their customers they have failed the checks and the suit was, I feel, legit. I don't know about your state but in mine you can't serve a drunk more alcohol and all sorts of things come with warnings on them. I am no fan of the nanny state that we have going on now BUT I feel this case had its merits and was certainly legit enough. I am not a lawyer.
No, thank you for your time. I love a decent conversation about great topics where we can agree to disagree. In this one I have the advantage of the court already having deemed it acceptable but I'd not just rely on that. Again, I'm not a lawyer. I just have some views of what justice is and I don't think justice should be "just us." In short, the suit was legitimate. Companies serve their coffee as hot today (or even hotter) because now they warn the idiots. Our society is about protecting those who can not protect themselves. (Or at least it *was* at one point. We can argue all day long about if it still is or not.)
"So long and thanks for all the fish."
GTA is a good game, no worse than any episode of The Sopranos. I've played it heaps, but had no RL urges to shoot cops, run over pedestrians, steal cars or not pay a hooker. The lawyers and moralists who got outraged at some pixelated lowpoly boobies need to get a life and a real job. Did they really think anyone would get out of bed for $5, head to Jack in the Box and declare "This tasty burger and beverage offsets the misery I experienced when I found and downloaded Hot Coffee"?
With class action lawsuits, all the risk is borne by the lawyers. If they don't win, they don't get paid. People whine that the consumer gets a $20 coupon while the lawyers make bank, but the consumer is getting something with no effort made or risk taken on his own. So if you don't like it, hire your own damn attorney and file your own damn lawsuit.
They say the devil's greatest trick was convincing the world he didn't exist. The devil has been one-upped; people in America have been brainwashed into thinking that standing up for themselves through unions or lawsuits is bad. They would rather money stay in the hands of those that wronged them rather than have it fall into the hands of (gasp) lawyers. They'd rather save $1000 a year in union dues rather than make another $10 an hour with 50% more vacation time. Americans excel at cutting off our noses to spite our faces.
I really want to see Mr. and Mrs. Pacman getting it on while Inky, Blinky, Pinky and Clyde watch...
The minigame play as "out-of-the-box" didn't have nudity. But some fragments of the necessary file where still around.
The whole constroversy was around this.
Paranoid parents complaining that the files where shipped on the disc (even if unaccessible and part broken)
Take-two defending themselves that the rating is on who the game is played (and nudity isn't normally accessed during game play).
"Sufficiently advanced satire is indistinguishable from reality." - [Tips: 1DrYakQDKCQ6y52z6QbnkxHXAocMZJE61o ]
I played the PC version of GTA:SA with the hot coffee setting turned on and I could not believe such a fuss was created about something so innocuous. In case anyone doesn't know, there's about 5 seconds of sex taking place INSIDE a house (with the camera showing the outside of the house), I was expecting graphic nudity given the amount of controversy. So this was merely about the fact that sex takes place in the game than any actual depiction of it.
That was the original "included" content... The "Hot Coffee" controversy is experienced by downloading and installing a patch file that enables the camera an "inside" view of the house and a mini-game that involved moving the analog sticks in a "rythmic" way....
That McDonald's hot coffee thing had more to it than a simple 2 word description would give (go figure). Apparently McDonald's was the only big business in the US to have coffee that friggin hot... it was something ludicrous like 20 or 30 degrees hotter than normal coffee. Normal coffee would be like "ouch, that was hot, damn"... the old version before the lawsuit of McDonald's coffee was "OMFG I JUST GOT 3rd DEGREE BURNS, i'm DYING!". And the lid had a glitch or something to make sure you'd spill it if held a certain way. Notice how McDonald's lids now are like the best lids at fast food places... you can't spill shit now.
I would like to send Take Two an extra $5 for putting the coffee mod into the game. I found it much more entertaining then that.
"I guess I'm gonna fade into Bolivian."
Unfortunately, it was not made clear that there was any option that this suit could be declared meritless or I wouldn't have put in my claim. When I saw that the class action had been settled for a fixed sum of money that Rockstar would end up paying regardless of my submitting a claim or not, I decided the best thing I could do would be to make my claim and then buy GTA4 with that money.
Since I didn't particularly agree with the reasons for the suit, I would have foregone the money if I'd known it would hurt the case of those who submitted it.
However, the settlement was not just $5 across the board. You can view details at the settlement site (http://gtasettlement.com/) but if you had proof of purchase (like I did), the offer was $35.
It's actually not that surprising . . . most people that buy a GTA game knows what kind of content to expect in the game (namely M rated stuff), so the hot coffee probably isn't enough to make these people want to get money from Take Two (that and $5 isn't worth the effort)