We note that several blogs devoted to the practice of law have been critical of Jack Thompson’s performance in the recent Bully court case in Florida.
The Tech Law Prof Blog writes:
“…Thompson called this new game a ‘Columbine simulator’ without having seen the game… As it turns out, there are no guns in the game, with the most powerful weapon being a slingshot and a baseball bat. Other rules of the game enforce positive social values…”
“So who are the winners and losers here? Jack Thompson, is the nominal loser. A favorable ruling in this case may have helped him in two other cases where he represents those aggrieved by the claimed effects of video games…”
“Thompson could have easily argued the nexus between violence and Rockstar Games if he could have gotten a Florida judge to agree that the brutal violence-weak Bully should be suppressed. As the judge wisely remembered his law on prior restraints and the First Amendment, Thompson will now have to prove that causal connection between playing the games and the murders to show liability. No plaintiff in similar suits involving movies, games, television, and music, coincidentally, has yet been able to do that…”
Meanwhile, both the American Constitution Society and the Above the Law blogs take the controversial attorney to task for a harsh letter he wrote to Miami-Dade Circuit Court Judge Ronald Friedman following the jurist’s dismissal of Thompson’s public nuisance suit against Bully.