October 27, 2006
GamePolitics readers may recall the lawsuit filed last year by an 86-year-old grandmother who purchased Grand Theft Auto San Andreas for her 14-year-old-son before the Hot Coffee revelations became known.The grandma, Florence Cohen, wants her fifty bucks back. Mrs. Cohen's attorneys are seeking to turn her claim into a class-action suit which would allow anyone who purchased the game before Hot Coffee came to light to seek damages against publisher Take-Two Interactive.
Yesterday, as reported by the New York Daily News, a Manhattan federal judge denied Take-Two's motion to limit the number of GTA San Andreas buyers who could join the class action. The judge may reconsider when details regarding the number and location of plaintiffs in the class become more clear.
Reuters has more.
Comments
Whoops, my mistake. I meant 140 degrees. 190 was for the gravy. ;)
McD's kept their coffee at 190, and that can give you severe burns in 2-5 seconds. And in a car, with a seatbelt, it takes much longer to squirm out of the way so the coffee isn't on your lap anymore...
I hope he was adopted
I don't think her case will get too far since she purchased the game for him despite his age. It's like buying cigarettes for a 15 year old. Sure he's only 3 years away from being able to legally use it, but it's still illegal
The reason the judge ruled in her favor wasn't because she was an idiot who deserved cash. It's because the coffee was WAY hotter than is safe. I used to work at one of McD's competitors, and we couldn't serve the coffee if the caraff was 190 degrees F or hotter. McD's was trying to make their coffee stay hot longer, by serving it insanely hot to begin with.
As others have pointed out, it wasn't that the coffee burned her, it's that it burned her much worse than a normal cup of fresh coffee, because they kept the caraff temp way too high. If they were worried about it cooling off, they should have used better insulated cups.
didn't she drive off with the cup of hot coffee in her lap or holding it? and isn't coffee suppose to be hot?
That's a classic one (and has also probably happened, if not specifically with that title). But what I think would be better would be a superfundie seeing Bible Black, and thinking "it's a cartoon with bible in the title, it must be wholesome Christian entertainment for children!" (I don't think I should get into the specifics of Bible Black, which is a pity. It's the specifics that make the schadenfruede so delicious. But I'm sure you have a search engine handy and can check yourself...)
You'd be able to hear the resulting head explosion for miles.
Honostly, what annoys me is I can see many of these people filing saying 'I want my money back! What, turn over the game to the defendant so they can destroy it? MY GAME!" If your suing the for the cost of the item, to be whole and not better, the item must be forgeighted. Many people will just want the money, I bet.
Andrew Eisen
The box said “Strong Sexual Content” on it. Bring your reading glasses to the store next time, Grandma.
/
QFE!
This is going to be laughed out of court. She doesn't have a leg to stand on. This is even more ludicrous thatn the lady who spilled the coffee on herself at McDonald's (Ironically, both cases involve hot coffee)
Just remember that the old lady that sued McDonald's actually WON. So that may not be a really good analogy that Rockstar may want to have;)
Didn't the McDonalds lady win? I thought she did
More info: http://lawandhelp.com/q298-2.htm
And IIRC, wasn't the original judgement "1 day of revenue from coffee"? Doesn't sound unreasonable now, does it?
The problem is, what it takes to punish a multinational is huge, and draws vultures. There needs to be a way to punish them without inciting ambulance chasers to sue at the drop of a hat.
This doesn't have to do with the Hot Coffee incident. The old biddy bought the game for her teenage grandson without looking at the M rating on the box and ignoring the fact that the title is of a criminal felony. Then when she saw the child playing she got outraged and tried to return it. She was denied due to the company return policy so she decided to sue RockStar to get her money back.
How wonderfuly absurd!
It also came out that McDonald's had been warned, and repeatedly so, about having their coffee that hot and ignored the warnings.
"An 86-year-old grandmother who purchased Grand Theft Auto San Andreas for her 14-year-old-son."
Please tell us more about this remarkable lady who became a mother at 72.
As for the coffee case, the lady wasn't driving, the car wasn't moving when it was spilt, and McD admitted in court that drinking coffee at the temp. they were serving it at would cause burns inside your mouth making it unfit for consuption as provided. This whole "coffee should be hot" ignores the fact that "coffee should be drinkable" and the state they were selling it in was undrinkable by definition of the people selling it.
She didn't even play it. She just bought it. Buyers don't read labels. Labels are for suckers.
Besides, Grand Theft Auto: Hooker bashing edition? That's totally appropriate for children. See, it has cartoon characters on the cover, so it's doubly ok.
Quick, someone sell this granny a copy of "Fritz the Cat". It's a cartoon, it must be ok...
This woman's WHOLE reason for the case is because of her finding out about the whole Hot Coffee thing, even though her grandson didn't even access it or anything in that manner. The only real reasoning I can see in a judge letting this go forward with class action status is so that instead of it just being one defeat, which would allow others to spring up, this will kill all potential suits on the matter. Though, I can't see how T2 could or should lose this given she bought a game that was clearly marked that it may not be appropriate for his age.
True, the judge hasn't even finished the prelims yet, so when the FTC report is brought up, I believe the case will be dropped. Or at worst, they'll order an exchange.
I did some quick googling and it appears that in order to get Hot Coffee in the PS2, you need that Game Genie-type thing (wow, did I just make myself sound old?)...anyway, the Xbox one it appears you need to actually have a modded Xbox, and have to install a mod for the game. If this old lady's grandson is 1337 enough to do that at age 14, I think he earned himself some simulated sex.
It's like if some popular childrens toy, if heated to 500 degrees, could then explode, possibly starting a fire. Does that make the toy a dangerous fire hazard? Because after all, any child that takes a blowtorch to the toy could accidently start a fire. And it's not as if children playing with blow torchs couldn't start a fire anyways, right?
"Quick, someone sell this granny a copy of “Fritz the Cat”. It’s a cartoon, it must be ok…"
"What's that you wanted, little Billy? Oh, I see...err, what's that title say? Urot-suki-doji? Oh, You-wrote-sue-key-dough-gee, ok...well, I guess all the kids are into this Annie-May stuff nowadays...."
“Quick, someone sell this granny a copy of “Fritz the Cat”. It’s a cartoon, it must be ok…”
----------
LOL!
- Warren Lewis
Ah, I remember that timeless classic...oops, I just dated myself.
The guy was buying GTA3.
Obviously, we warned him, and showed him the label. And, thankfully, he went over to the shelves to get a different game.
My next-door neighbour, however, got GTA: Vice City when he was 13 or so. He still has it. And San Andreas now.
*sigh* When will people learn...
Maybe Game and the like need a special section in each store for games of each rating.
THIS IS THE PC 18+ AREA! THIS IS THE PC 15+ AREA! THIS IS THE "GAMES MADE FOR YOUNGER KIDS ASSUMING THEY'RE STUPID" AREA!
Whoops, tangent. :D
Also, this is just ridiculous. What kind of idiot is she? Buying a game clearly meant for a 17 year old, not a 14 year old...