March 29, 2007 -
We're not sure what to make of this just yet, but...Last week GamePolitics reported that anti-game attorney Jack Thompson had responded to a lawsuit filed against him by Take Two Interactive with a counterclaim charging the GTA publisher with violating federal RICO statutes. Such charges are typically used to prosecute organized crime syndicates.
GP's review of federal court documents over morning coffee reveals that Thompson filed an amended document yesterday revising his answer to Take Two's complaint as well as his counterclaim. The new countersuit section, surprisingly, makes no mention whatsoever of the RICO allegations.
In fact the counterclaim has been shortened from an original length of nearly 20 pages to a single paragraph:
If the court finds that it has jurisdiction over this matter, it should review the video games in question, allow a review of those games by this defendant and then hear argument if requested by this defendant as to wherein the Plaintiff should be enjoined from distributing video games to minors.
It is unknown what prompted Thompson to drop the RICO allegations. Although the controversial attorney sent out a press release on March 21st trumpeting the original RICO filing, GP has received no such announcement regarding the changes. An e-mail request for clarification has not yet received a response.
Also not mentioned in the revised complaint are GamePolitics, Joystiq, Kotaku, Penny Arcade, GameSpot, Spong or any of the other game media which Thompson's original complaint alleged had “collaborated and conspired" with Take Two.
Read the original 37-page document containing the RICO allegations here.
Read the amended 14-page document without RICO here.
Comments
I also note, with a great deal of amusement, in the original claim, Jack Thompson's assertation that 'removing Thompson’s state remedy' also removes the ENTIRE STATE OF FLORIDA'S remedy to any alleged breach of the law by Take Two. Strange, I would have thought the State of Florida would have more than one person able to enforce the law. Maybe I'm wrong. After all, I'm not even from Florida, far less a Florida lawyer.
You know, that does remind me of one comment from Jack Thompson's lifetime supply of BS towards Game Politics back when it was on LiveJournal. Jack used a rather racist remark and then eventually said he was one of that kind of people too. Just because he calls himself one doesn't mean it's all right to call others by the same derogatory remark too.
Of course, as you said, then again, it's JT.
Turns out, it happens when someone lacks various ideas, such as self-hate and self-doubt, or a healthy conscience, and I guess some need additional treatment, because they have this problem where they love the sound of their voice way too much.
I think JT could really use the surgery, I guess they're really getting good at it. Apparenlty, it's a rather common problem.
This is the reply that I recieved after asking him whether he had dropped the RICO charges because a real lawyer had reviewed them or if he had realized that PROOF is needed to prosecute. I'm guessing his co-counsel is the real attorney here. As for executing anything flawlessly, revision (revising his lawsuit) is usually a sign that you are admitting a mistake.
It gets even better. I mailed him about the insult because I am scottish, and he replied that he was scottish too (and that I should grow up and stuff like that).
I thought that was rather odd... then again... it's JT
Anyways, one thing I would like to find out. Does anyone know where you can find the full listing of who was named in the RICO accusation of his? Because it only listed a few and then said "many more" if memory serves me right.
I think he's made that statement about the Scottish a few times with some variations. Wikiquote lists that he said "sipping single malt whiskey".
What exactly does he have against the Scottish? (my family tree traces back to Scotland)
Let's put Jack in the ring before he goes to Heaven!
"If the court finds that it has jurisdiction over this matter, it should review the video games in question, allow a review of those games by this defendant and then hear argument if requested by this defendant as to wherein the Plaintiff should be enjoined from distributing video games to minors."
Take 2 doesn't distribute to minors, they distribute to retail outlets who then SELL to minors. Take 2 is off the hook.
All an M rating means is that due to the game’s contents, it is recommended for players 17 and up. So, no, that isn’t prove that the game isn’t marketed to kids. However, ads on a bus (unless we’re talking a school bus) also don’t prove a game is marketed to kids. Until Thompson and his ilk can provide a worthwhile example like commercials on Nickelodeon or ads in Highlights magazine, their complaints won’t hold water.
Now, while publishers are indeed responsible for advertising, they are not responsible for who retailers decide to sell to so yelling at Take-Two when Best Buy sells a minor a copy of The Warriors is stupid and futile.
Andrew Eisen
In truth, he probably just assembled the original in a hasty and angry state of mind and realized after the fact that it was folly. So, he revised it, so it wouldn't completely destroy his career, yet. I would think though that the original rant, er counter-claim would still have an impact on the outcome. I seem to recall judges citing original complaints in cases I've seen. Also wouldn't the judge be allowed access to the original as it would still pertain to the case? If not, couldn't T2 bring it up as evidence against JT? Or would this be illegal in some law I am unfamilar with?
I still love Jack's response to A-wel Cruiz's e-mail: I'm going to heaven!
But hey, don't forget the quote "Heaven just isn't hot enough/ Burn me alive inside", Prayer by Disturbed.
Still, it makes me wonder, with all this going on, you must think that the Flordia bar is watching carefully, cause this may be the excuse they need to finally take thompsons license away.
So, any legal beagles out there care to take a quees as to what the end results of this suit will be? Just asking.
Oh, gee, what happened to that? Did it not work? Where's the "urgent!" press release on that?
I'll take that bet! While he has gone back on such things, saying that he'll pay $10,000 or whatever it was to who ever made a game where it's basically Columbine at a game company (right? I don't quite remember) was only satire, to make this new law so pathetic...Basically, none of that bullshit the other had, that's what seems odd to me; not that he changed it, but that he took so much out.
What is it that's going on in his head besides the usual?...
"At any rate, it’s not like him to change his tune once he starts playing, so this is kinda baffling."
Baffled by Jack changing his tune? Pfft.
We are perhaps forgetting some of his previous escapades. Need I mention the donation-as-satire incident? Backpeddling and recanting are regular elements of this man's repertoire.
Double or nothing this isn't the last revision.
Nope, he simply tells the court "your job should be to review the game to see if it passes the test, and I should win because I'm right, nyeah". He's not only stupid, he apparently has a poor memory, because this argument that was explicitly REJECTED on first amendment grounds by a Florida judge in a rather recent case. In fact the way in which he told the judge what his job should be is the what has landed him into disbarment proceedings again!
What ultimately will torpedo him is this: he's representing himself. A fool for a client indeed.
"I'm sorry i didn't realize it was a real lawsuit, i meant for that to be my press release."
Anywa i don't think Rockstar is even finished with GTA4 and Manhunt 2, if they were i highly doubt they would make the release dates, so far away.
Hell is the opposite of Heaven.
Therefore, videogames will be in Heaven.
Therefore, Jack would prefer to reside in Hell.
Therefore, Jack gets self-PWN'd yet again.
How can he do that for a game where screen shots and information aren't available to even those who actually WANT the game to be released?
I played SDvR06 with your Jack Thompson formula and would love an updated 07 version.
And sorry for Jack, but people who ignore whole sections of the Bible they find inconvenient don't go to Heaven.
The old documents should still be on file. BUT... is it possible, in John Bruce thinking, that he changed his suit just because of the shareholder meeting today?
John Bruce begins ranting at meeting.
Someone brings up first version of suit.
John Bruce points out he changed the suit at the last minute.
Oh.
Meeting over.
John Bruce changes suit back to first version.
Possible? Legal?
nightwng2000
NW2K Software
No video games in heaven, eh? And by extension probably no sex either. Sounds like a damn boring place to me. Well, two more quotes come to mind:
"I'd rather laugh with the sinner than cry with the saints. The sinners have much more fun." - Billy Joel, "Only the Good Die Young"
"If you're going to miss Heaven, why miss it by an inch? Just miss it!" - Sam Kinison
@ nightwing2000
Yeah, I had the same thought. I wouldn't put it past him. He probably changed it for exactly that reason. Wouldn't be surprised if he reverted to the original tomorrow.
BTW, if was was planning to attend the meeting, wouldn't he have sent out one of his self-aggrandizing press releases as per his usual M.O.? His lack of one would suggest he may not show.
He would be sueing himself...
And he's not going to heaven. The 9th commandment takes care of that.
To be fair I think there is a conspiracy against him, I haven't seen anyone anywhere on the interweb who actually agrees with his crap or doesn't want him run over by a bus.
It's not an organised conspiracy though, unless you count his orchestration of this universal hatred.
To save his fledgling career and possibily his dignity.
From the amended document:
“Thompson never, as Take-Two has incorrectly alleged, proceeded against Take-Two’s Bully nor threatened to similarly come against Grand Theft Auto IV and Manhunt 2 in an attempt to prevent either game’s commercial release.”
One minute he's proudly mass-mailing his intentions to the game industry, the next he's playing innocent. Silly.
http://gamepolitics.com/2006/12/29/jt-on-2007/
1) The "But my wife has cancer" defense.
2) The "I'm just like Russell Crowe in the movies" defense.
3) The "I'm like Martin Luther King" defense.
JT: "I spit in the eye of the great T2 monster... and he blinked. He then proceded to hack at my neck with the pointy bits of a broken GTAIII CD. But I dont care I'm going to heaven any way *pffftttttt*"
T2: "LOLz welcome to hell NUB!"
"Jack Thompson, you just spent thousands of your wife's money and wasted everyone's time. What are you gonna do now?"
"I'M GOING TO HEAVENNNNNN!"
I've literally heard 5 year olds use that same comeback.
"Oh, no, very sad. I'm going to Heaven. You apparently aren't. That will
give you an eternal sadness. No video games in Hell, ace."
Now THERE'S the Jack we all know and love, or should I say loathe.
I think I'm done wasting my time on him now. It's not worth the energy, and reading his replies are giving my brain the dumb.
it's the retailers that deal with the end customers, and T2 can no more stop distributing to minors than Best Buy can stop producing the games
The most obvious reason I can think of for this change of pace, is that Jack would need to prove racketeering, and that the various other groups he reffered to in the conspiracy were in fact consciously working together to bring him together.
But then I read that paragraph carefully and noticed that Jack was in fact, still full of shit. What Jack is attempting here is to replicate the Bully fiasco of last fall. He will undoubtedly bring the absolute worst parts of the game to light, bereft of context in order to portray Take two as a band of baby eating monsters. furthermore, no suggestion is made anywhere in the title about opposing counsel having the right to explain the situations logic to the judge.
"how sad"
Hmm, no threats, no namecalling, no grandstanding. Methinks JT is starting to lose his touch. Or maybe he learned his lesson from the Mortal Kombat Armaggeddon fiasco.
Anyone want me to make a CAW for SvR2007?
Well duh. Can't have anyone having a differing opinion now can we?