Jack Thompson and Take-Two may be revisiting the courts soon, despite a previous settlement.
Take-Two and Jack Thompson may be readying for battle once again, only a short while after the two enemies signed an agreement which was hoped to have settled their legal bickering once and for all.
The agreement
reportedly kept Thompson from being disbarred, provided he no longer filed any public nuisance cases against Take-Two and refrained from contacting companies which Take-Two does business with.
Since then,
GamePolitics has reported that Thompson received a letter from Take-Two which warns he may be in breach of the settlement after contacting the Governor and Attorney General of Florida to warn them about
"an incredibly violent game called Manhunt 2."
Thompson disputes the claim that he is in breach of the settlement, pointing out that although he agreed to stop filing cases against Take-Two he never agreed to stop contacting members of the US government and that any contract which would attempt such a thing would be in violation of his First Amendment rights and therefore would be un-enforceable.
It's an interesting and somewhat slippery way to get out trouble for ol' JT, but it also seems to be a pretty bullet-proof argument from a legal point of view.
Apparently, Jack Thompson has filed a complaint against Take-Two's attorneys in reply to the letter - which seems more than a little spiteful, if you ask us.
Is all fair in love and arguments about the effects violent games may have on society? Still annoyed
Manhunt 2 won't see a release for a while, if at all? Drop us
your comments and tell us what you think.
Parents should ['should' being the key word!] make the judgements for their own kids and people over the age of <whatever constitutes being an adult in whichever US state> should be allowed to decide for themselves on these matters.
It really bothers me to think that various people or groups think they have some moral obligation to 'censor' others from whatever material they [the moralists] deem unfit.
Jack -- just give it a rest. Voice your opinion, fine. But let people make their own decisions. They don't need you trying to get things banned for them. If they don't want it, they won't buy it.
Of course, they could always attempt to have the agreement expanded. Or cancel it altogether, and finally get his ass disbarred.
Then Jack could go and open a hot dog stand with that guy who sued his drycleaner for 64million for losing his pants!
I think they'd make a good couple. ;)
to be honest, I dont think he ever will!
bah, they should have just got rid of the guy when they had the chance, hes an ass, the game isn't even going to hit the shelves and hes bashing it
gtfo jack, crawl back in your hole (which he seemed to disappear into for the last few months, ahh peaceful times)
but his campaign is to remove violence from video games / remove violent video games
either way he is trying to stop people from playing violent video games because people under the age rating may get hold of them
however, as has been discussed i don't know how many times, it is the parents responsibility to do this
The rest of us shouldn't have to lose our violent (and fun) games because some kids might get hold of them
and even then its not like its worth while because even in the UK parents just buy games for their kids without any knollege and completly ignoring the rating anyway
That's why I said 15 or 18 rated games, BBFC only affects 15 or 18 games.
No, they have a voluntary only system, as I said.
But as i said its not like an involuntary system works either because even in Britain where they are enforceable, parents will just buy the game without knowledge anyway, or of course you can order off the Internet and fake your age anyway
Also, the PEGI ratings in the UK are labelled as 16+ and 18+, PEGI is also carried out by the coder, games which are found to be marked 16+ or 18+ (even some marked 12+) are automatically rated by the BBFC as well.
Spot checks are made by the BBFC on developers as well.
I'm pretty certain that his original policy was claiming that violent FPS games were being used as murder simulators and attributing several violent games to gun cases and murders in America. A key quote of his: “Murder simulators are not constitutionally protected speech. They’re not even speech. They’re dangerous physical appliances that teach a kid how to kill efficiently and to love it,”
I also remember reading several bits where he claimed that on the Sims2; a cheat where you can remove the shower when kids were in it (something like that) ,was being utilized by paedophiles to practice their molesting methods. There are tonnes of funny/useless/irritating information like this about JT, which highlights to me that things have become personal between R* and Take-Two and that he will perpetually argue with them to prevent the release of the games or to delay them.