so accusing the woman of being crazy and a liar is "toning it down" is it?

Yup, good old jack

petty petty jack

angry hatefilled and childish jack

i could go on.........



But seriously, what did jack hope to gain from sending the emails here? Clearly he knows we know he's a jackass, he doesnt need to prove it, his comments are doing that job for him.

That is pretty nuts. I was always a bit on the fence refarding Thompson and his shenadigans, but now I am a believer that the guys has a screw loose.
Gena seems to be articulate, reasonable and level-headed throughout this, whilst Jack comes off as some 15 year old flamer. Madness

Jack, take a break and try to think about what fights to pick, she's explained the legalities to you. Go find someone you can actually scare with your vague and unfounded legal inaccuracies.

This isn't at all surprising to me. If credit cards are indeed acceptable age verification by the FTC then Thompson has no legal leg to stand on. That he's been lying about that fact is hardly surprising either.

Mr. Thompson again I feel, as a Christian myself, that we are mandated to not bear (bare?) false witness.

I fail to understand why you seem to think that its alright to lie and diseminate false information about people you don't agree with. Aren't actions like those the very defintion of false witness?

Hey, that picture of him at the top of the article. What's the bet he's playing Counterstrike on that?

And... hold on, I can edit that picture. You know, put a cowboy hat on him and give him a big red moustache..

Additionally, who did he send the first e-mail to. It wouldn't surprise me if Zelnick and Feder are not part of the "designated contact person in Take-Two's Office of General Council." which would be a direct violation of paragraph 3 of their settlement.

Yep I've susses Jack out.

This is his ridiculous method of practicing law (no wonder why he lost all his cases and is being disbarred)

He's kicking at hornet's nests so he can point fingers during his disbarment, fortunately this wont work, and the more he does maybe, just maybe he'll look stupid enough that the general public will at last see him for what he is.

Jack is going down kicking and screaming, but he's going down, and thats what matters.


Bye bye jack! whats next for you? flipping patties at McDonalds?

Whether the "settlement" counts in the same manner, there are plenty of legal documents that exist that legally prevent individuals from making comments or taking certain actions. Documents which could be seen as violation the Freedom of Speech of individuals, yet are legally binding.

Certainly, Confidentiality Agreements and Non-Disclosure Agreements are such documents. And formal Gag Orders are also among them as well.

I also wonder if Ms. Feist also knows that John Bruce still sent out copies of those emails, even though he made it appear that he was communicating with her privately. So much for the "Trust Me" bit at the beginning of the tirade.

Nightwng2000
NW2K Software

Wow - anyone want to take bets on how long it will take wacko-jacko to show up? You know what strikes me as curious? He keeps calling Dennis all kinds of things - he calls him everything from incompetent to an industry stooge. But he keeps sending him material, why send emails with Take2 to someone he thinks is incompetent? What's up with that?

If using credit cards is a violation then why does alot of other sites from porn to ebay allow it? Also, wasn't there a time when certain senators were pushing myspace to use a credit card as verification for age???

You know, I really feel sympathy for his family. I wonder how many fights his kids have gotten into because they were teased about dear old dad?

I can't quite tell for sure...


But that looks like a pretty nice computer monitor Jack's got there :)

Why the hell are these Emails public?

Mr. Kanders,
If you think his emails are bad, you should see his legal documents, if you haven't already.

Nightwng2000
NW2K Software

@RJ

Okay, we all hate the man, but we don't have to bring his family into it. That's his tactic.

nightwng2000 « If you think his emails are bad, you should see his legal documents, if you haven’t already. »

I remember a few of them (made public by Jack himself). Those were a nightmare to decyfer.

I don't understand, if the FTC allows Credit Cards as age verification (they clearly do, thanks to the link from Gena Feist), why does Jack continually blame TTWO? When, if he has an issue with this age verification (and he has a point there), why doesn't he direct his ire at the FTC, or write his legislators? Isn't that typically how people deal with problems? From the source?

His ability to either fail at reading comprehension, or his apparent blindness to contrary evidence is astounding. If only he was as skilled at truth ...

Then TT would be hailed as heroes for killing off the last bastard in the "legal" system.

in before jack shows up and accuses denis of manipulating information sent to him.

and just when you thought he couldn't make himself look more like an idiot.

I find the idea that Jack Thompson asked someone if they are nuts to be hilarious.

Holy crap they need to put this on TV; though if Jack Thompson was a fictional character I'd have a really hard time suspending my disbelief, how could a real person be so thick-headed.

I particularly like the part where he says "You'll live to regret it (trust me)"; I didn't know real people talked like that, is Jack Thompson a super-villain (it's not the first time he's said that either)? Then later when he goes on the accuse them of threats was kind of like the punch-line.

I can't wait for next week’s episode.

Surely Jack's words in the email violate section of the settlement, in which Jack agreed not to threaten them, at all. i say he's violated his agreement.
also... imo, he's not so much a threat to gamers/ game companies any more, most of the people i know look upon hiim as a comic relief act.

So nice to know he hasn't found his marbles yet.

inb4 Thompson accuses me of having played Doom, of which I have not.

Age verification online is a new and hard to enforce area, in that sense JT is properly concerned. In most locations there is no law restricting the sale of rated games (or movies not calssified as pornography) so Take Two is in the right there and a lawyer should know that.

He has no real legal position for the lack of verification, but a conflicting personal point of view and a lawyer should know that. However the personal attacks against a staff member of Take Two shows just how much of a vendetta JT has against Take Two and will use scare tactics and risk breaking contracts to carry that vendetta out.

(This is all assuming the emails are accurate and JT sent them in so if they were editted to make him look more favorable then...just eep)

Wow...he's so bored that he's actually DIGGING for things to come up.

Baiting T2 into falling into a legal trap is pathetic, Jack. Take up a normal hobby - you know, fishing, reading novels, playing video games...just do something! I'm honestly getting tired of watching you continually getting shot down.

I am disturbed by the violence threatened toward JT. Even in jest, this is exactly the type of thing that he argues we will do.

@NecroSen

I was thinking that too. I've never tried to buy a firearm online, but I have taken an interest in accessing other *ahem* age-restricted content. I've never, ever seen any "age verification software" that didn't involve credit cards. And anyway, how would that even work? How does one write a program that can tell the biological age of the user? It boggles the mind.

Nice one, Kharne!

I think the card discussion might be a question of wording- what Jack says in his email is:

"You also know that the use of a bank card as an age verifier is a violation of all bank card agreements, right?"

Two things spring to mind- the term "bank card agreements" implies that while the FTC might well give the OK for bank cards as age verification, the contract that Take-Two have signed with whomever handles the rockstargames.com store's CC transactions- or the card holder's agreement- might say that you can't do it, which presumably would override the FTC. He also stops short of saying it's illegal. Given that other sites use cards for age verification, this is unlikely, however.

Secondly- a "bank card" might be different to a "credit card", in that a *bank* card might only let you take money out of your account, (or even just use a cashpoint but not buy things directly) while a *credit* card allows you to borrow money from your credit company- and verify your age with it.

The latter is more likely- we have this distinction in the UK, and it would make sense for both cards to have different rules from one another- and there is, of course, an outside chance that Jack's right on this one as the US might have different rules to the UK ones I'm basing this on, but it's still information worth considering.

/b

Goosey,

From the FTC:

Access Verification

At a parent's request, operators must disclose the general kinds of personal information they collect online from children (for example, name, address, telephone number, email address, hobbies), as well as the specific information collected from children who visit their sites. Operators must use reasonable procedures to ensure they are dealing with the child's parent before they provide access to the child's specific information.

They can use a variety of methods to verify the parent's identity, including:

*

obtaining a signed form from the parent via postal mail or facsimile;
*

accepting and verifying a credit card number;
*

taking calls from parents on a toll-free telephone number staffed by trained personnel;
*

email accompanied by digital signature;
*

email accompanied by a PIN or password obtained through one of the verification methods above.

Operators who follow one of these procedures acting in good faith to a request for parental access are protected from liability under federal and state law for inadvertent disclosures of a child's information to someone who purports to be a parent.

"As you should be aware, credit cards cannot be used to verify the age of buyers. Kids have credit cards, and they use parents’ credit cards. You have then got to be kidding me."

Sure, some kids might have credit cards. And if a parent is responsible enough, they'll remove the game once they see the credit card bill, the game itself, etc, IF they deem that it's inappropriate for the child. As for using the parents' credit cards, that whole process could stop right there, at the parents' wallets.

The more obvious thing here is that clearly, the parents aren't as concerned as you are, seeing as how video games don't turn people into hardened criminals.

Didn't his psych eval state that he would curtail the ad hominem attacks? Guess not. I'm sure the rest of the evaluation was on the up-and-up, though.

i couldnt help but make that edit that blackice mentioned. :P

That's nice, but which edit would that be? (I have huge holes in my memory.)

this one: http://www.geocities.com/dm_stormwind/jt-cowboy.jpg

(bleh, doesnt seem to want to let me use html tags to show the pic)

God that was funny! Everyone, you have got to see that!

Can we really trust someone who cannot spell to try to stick up for "the children"? (I don't believe what he does help children in anyway.) Not only is he a moron, but he also doesn't have the common sense to hit the spell check button before sending off his treat of an email.
Kudos to Gena for having the patience to deal with this man/boy/baby. I would've got so mad at the computer screen for letting me read such stupidity, I would've kicked my laptop.
I truly wish, for all the past, present, and future gamers, that Take Two takes him on in court, and whoops his ass.
(Jack, in case you read this, that's not a threat.)

@Lumi

Or, possibly, a firing squad?

M rated games are like R-rated movies. All that matters is the purchase, and all that someone needs to purchase it is a legal guardian/parent who allows it.

Even then, it's not 'illegal' for a minor to purchase it. No one's going to go prison for buying or selling it like that, it's just more of a retailer rule. They have the final say on whether they will sell a game to a minor.

Wow. Just wow. Jack is even more pathetic then I thought.

@ Chuma

This may sound cruel, but I don't care if his actions eventually lead to his financial ruin that hurts his family. I don't even care if his kid gets beaten up at school because he's a 'Jack' ass. It's not my fault, nor would it be Take Two's. It would be a direct result of Jack's idiocy, so I would blame no one but him. We must be held responsible for our own actions, and that includes the results of bad decisions.

Don't worry, though. I'll bet his wife divorces him when it becomes obvious he's on the verge of losing it all. Then, his fall would be complete. All because he doesn't like a form of media.

By the way. I'm NOT condoning beating up his son. I would still hope that any little hellion that decided to assault him would be punished properly. It's just that I'd realize it was a direct result of his father's actions. Whatcha wanna bet he would, too?

@ WarOtter

That seems a little.... extreme. Even for a guy I hate. ALOT! (see my comments to chuma)

@Gameboy

Oh come on! how is that extreme!? True, i'd rather kill him through torture rather than cripple him, but hate is something that should be expressed!

Oh, Jack, you can't sue me for this. You don't know who I am.

Goosey,

"Credit cards may be appropriate to ascertain parental consent for a child’s actions,"

So we agree then? I'm lost as to your issue, I guess. Jack has inadvertently started a good discussion, once again through no fault of his own. Aristotle has sent an letter to the FTC stating valid concerns, but still, the FTC rules are explicit - currently a Credit Card is implied parental consent.

This is by no means fool-proof, and for alcohol, tobacco, or firearms online sales, further age/identity verification is warranted and required under the FTC. But you aren't seriously comparing video game purchases to these things, right? Second Life, or other MMO's are a different issue altogether, having a very real risk of child predators. But buying a rated M game has no such risks.

The real question, and the one Jack with never ask, is: Is stricter regulation of M or R rated content needed for online sales? I say no. For AO or NC-17 or Un-rated or, perhaps, MMO's, maybe.

http://pics.livejournal.com/prraak/pic/0000197f

:)

"You’ll live to regret it (trust me), so enjoy it while you can."

Wow, that sure sounds like a personal threat to me.

This will only lead to bad things for Thompson...if this behavior continues and is then made public than he will continue to lose all the credibility he has with the sheep who actually believe him.

It would be amazing if gamers would file a class action lawsuit for slander and harrasment against thompson...with all the inflammatory remarks and insults I could see a win.

Mike

I can't speak for all states, but Maryland residents operating the web and/or software that enter "contracts" thru a push of a button are binding. If you claim thru a checkbox that your age is 17-or-older in MD, you'd better be 17-or-older or you become responsible for the content you're "exposed" to. The check-box/button option admits that the control of the internet content is ultimately the responsibility of the end-user. When that comes to minors, that means the parents. Even so, since the ESRB is an industry practice, age-verification for M-rated games is merely a bona-fide attempt to match the end-user with appropriate content. Failure to comply has no ramifications, save those of industry self-regulation, and this argument is moot.

However, the decision to effectively render private communications public by forwarding to Game Politics is reprehensible at best, but also shows which party is making the most effort to abide by their end of the settlement, and that would be Take Two.

*pictures not picures. We need an Edit button.

[...] Read more about it over at Game Politics. Game Politics: Take Two Warns Jack Thompson Over Manhunt 2 [...]

Yeah, lets see here. He started a chain of emails accusing the company's VP of being a liar, nuts, and the like. Nice harassment.

@gameboy

While I find some of the implications disturbing - and actively agree with others, I must admit that "Jack Thompson, Wal-Mart greeter", would be delicious schadenfreude indeed.

@chuma

I've also had some concerns for his family after seeing some of the stunts he's pulled. I imagine you're right that his children receieve some real flak over his antics.

@ BlackIce

Nothing disparaging was said about his family; I've no reason to believe they aren't relatively decent human beings. On the contrary, the sentiment expressed was concern for them, considering that their father's words and actions can't be helping their social standing or acceptance in school, or elsewhere.

You know, if I used my parent's credit card to buy ANYTHING my ass would be throughly tanned.

Messages from this Thompson guy read like immature flames on some message board. I wonder how he passed the BAR?

God, what a childish jerk.

Hey, JT. Why not take up the online age-verification crusade? The FTC guidelines may indeed be a bit lax, plus there is all kinds of inappropriate things sold online.

You made too much of an ass of yourself over videogames. Perhaps you can get a fresh start with this. Just remember to be polite and mature. I know its hard for you to do, but you should be able to muster up the disipline to do so.

@Lumi

I was talking to RJ about leaving his family out of this..

guy is an ass

Dennis McCauley apparently doesn't own a telephone, which is an invention that's been around even longer that a DualShock controller. He might want to use it next time. If he had this time, he would have learned that:

There is no "erosion" of the settlement between Take-Two and me. This is just an example of Take-Two's regretting that it signed an agreement that allows me to continue to beat on Take-Two, to the FTC, to public interest organizations, and elsewhere. If Take-Two's genius lawyers at Blank Rome thought I was going away, they miscalculated, and failed to put into the agreement constraints on what I am doing. Wouldn't be the first time Blank Rome screwed up.

Oh, relatedly, you all might find the following interesting, re The Florida Bar. Hooah!
John B. Thompson, Attorney at Law
1172 S. Dixie Hwy., Suite 111
Coral Gables, Florida 33146

August 31, 2007

John Ellis “Jeb” Bush
Segovia Tower
Coral Gables, Florida 33134 Via Hand-Delivery This Day

Re: Your Upcoming Deposition in Bar v. Thompson

Dear Governor Bush:

I hope this letter finds you and your family well. We’re glad you’re here in Coral Gables and pleased that you seem to be enjoying your hiatus from the hurly-burly of elected office. You’ve earned it.

While you were Governor, I was busy getting the Howard Stern Show off terrestrial radio (Howard Stern: “This lunatic lawyer in Miami got me off the air!”) for comments like “Ever bang any famous nigger chicks? What do they smell like? Watermelons?”). Along the way to that success, I got Stern first off all Clear Channel stations in February 2004 and then off Beasley Broadcast Group’s WQAM-AM here in Miami as well as off its Ft. Myers station. Beasley, by the way, owns and operates a number of “Christian radio stations” and has given a lot of money to the RNC. Real “family values” folks, huh?

While I was securing these successes, Stern and his Infinity/Viacom radio group were, of course, actively violating 18 USC 1464, which prohibits the airing of indecent material on the public airwaves between 6 am and 10 pm (See FCC v. Pacifica, in which the US Supreme Court held constitutional this prohibition because of the presence of kids in significant numbers in the broadcast audience).

My successful efforts against Stern included a $3.5 million Consent Decree between Viacom/Infinity and the FCC by which both agreed that Stern’s shows were indecent in violation of 18 USC 1464, and the FCC acknowledged that I was part of that Consent Decree as one of the complainants. I was happy to help. I had no client in any of that. I was a Christian acting on the requirements of my faith and meager gifts He gave me.

In the midst of that success, I wrote you, as our Governor, about the role that your friend, Al Cardenas, former Florida GOP Chairman, and his Tew Cardenas law firm were playing in desperately trying to keep the Howard Stern Show on the air despite my efforts. Cardenas’ law firm was very aggressively doing what it could to target me, I believe in violation of state and federal laws, for harm because of my First Amendment-protected efforts against the Stern show. Al and his firm couldn’t defend the content of Stern on WQAM, so they engaged in their “shoot the messenger” strategy. Dumb.

Al Cardenas, inadvertently proving my point, then filed, along with his law partner Larry Kellogg of Tew Cardenas and Caroline Beasley, CFO of Beasley Broadcast Group, what is known as a SLAPP Florida Bar complaint, against me in retribution for my writing you, the Governor, to alert you to a) this criminal broadcast activity (18 USC 1464 is a criminal statute), and b) Al Cardenas’ and his firm’s role in it. Kellogg foolishly said to my lawyer at the time that what really precipitated the SLAPP complaint was my letter to you. Dumber.

SLAPP, by the way, is an acronym for strategic litigation against public participation, and this “shoot the messenger” strategy by people like Al Cardenas has become such an encroachment upon First Amendment petition rights of citizens that several states have “anti-SLAPP “ laws, including Florida.

Unfortunately for both you and for me, the pendency of one remaining count in the blunderbuss Tew Cardenas/Beasley SLAPP Bar complaint against me remains, and we are supposedly going to trial on that. The Bar, signaling how flimsy is this count, has offered to dismiss it with prejudice. The Bar should go ahead and do that right now, but The Bar refuses. People have agendas here, the overarching one of which is that The Bar, now headed by new Florida Bar President, Miami lawyer Frank Angones, seeks to punish and pathologize my faith-based conservative activism. Frank should know better, as a Pedro Pan refugee from Castro’s anti-free speech regime, but Lord Acton’s aphorism has apparently clouded Frank’s judgment.

What I do know, Governor, is that I get to take your deposition about all this. You were and are in the middle of what Al Cardenas has foolishly done. You are, of course, listed as a witness for me on two separate witness lists—one for discovery and the other for trial in the Bar matter.

You are there on those lists, really, because Al Cardenas never heard, apparently, what Winston Churchill said when asked, as an accomplished watercolorist, what the hardest thing about painting was. Said the great man: “Knowing when to stop.”

Al Cardenas, in order to protect his and his firm’s lobbying and political relationship with you and with your brother, filed this SLAPP Bar complaint against me. Al even swore in that complaint, interestingly, that Beasley/WQAM had no nexus to the pornography industry. Al swore that at a time that a radio show that Stern himself called “pornographic” was on WQAM. Al swore that at a time when WQAM was running ads on its air in the middle of the day for men’s strip joints with “full friction dancing,” with WQAM actually doing station appearances at these porn clubs. Fascinating what Al Cardenas will swear to. It is not known if Kendall Coffey was there for the station promos.

I have filed a federal lawsuit, now before US District Court Judge Adalberto Jordan here in Miami, that alleges that this Bar complaint stunt by Tew Cardenas is an effort to chill my First Amendment speech and to protect that firm’s relationship with you and the Bushes. That is also one of my defenses in the state disciplinary proceedings, so I get to depose you and inquire about all of that and more. You can thank Al Cardenas for the opportunity you and I have to meet again.

I should, then, like to know what dates and times you are available in September for your aforementioned deposition. I think you should set aside four hours for the exercise. I should also like to know if you want me to have you served with a subpoena, or if your lawyer, whoever it is, will agree to do this by service of the subpoena on him/her or simply by agreement. Also, I want to accommodate you and do this in a location most convenient to you. I know this whole thing is not convenient for you; but it certainly is not for me either. Your friend, Al Cardenas, is trying to rip my law license away from me in order to protect his relationship with the Bush family. Al declared a war here, at children’s expense, by the way, and you are, in a sense “collateral damage.” As I say, blame Al, not me.

Just a few more things: The Judge presiding over this matter as the Bar’s referee is Circuit Court Judge Dava Tunis. Small world. As you may recall, you appointed her to the Circuit Court bench after she served on your task force looking at violence against women. It is ironic that Judge Tunis’ rulings in the Bar matter have served a) to protect the criminal stalking of one of my clients who was in Judge Tunis’ courtroom yesterday with me, and b) to protect a law firm and a radio station that featured a Stern program that described, in graphic detail, how female amputees could lubricate their “stumps” and place them into the anuses of men in order for the men to achieve orgasm.

Al Cardenas apparently thinks stumps in anuses and other porn is appropriate fare for kids on the radio during the day.

How a judge can continue to issue rulings that protect that kind of thing, while coming to public prominence concerning the targeting of women, is ironic. But that is not the only irony here.

My designated reviewer in these Bar matters has been Ben Kuehne. He is a Bar Governor who has received a “target letter” from your brother’s Justice Department for allegedly laundering Medellin cocaine cartel money. These are the people who sit in judgment of me, and these are the people, not I, who have determined that I must take your deposition.

Finally, should your lawyers argue that you are somehow shielded from this discovery, I think they will find that is a bunny trail not worth their going down. A sitting President was recently deposed in a sexual harassment case, and surely you, as a former Governor, are not shielded from the judicial process, especially not when a lobbyist tried to protect his relationship with you by unleashing the state on me.

Again, I’m sorry about this, but Al has made this all unavoidable. Please let me know quickly as to the dates and times and location for this skirmish in what some have called the “culture war.”

Oh, one more thing. I know you know our mutual friend, [redacted]. You can call him [redacted] to confirm that all of the above is true. [redacted] got Al Cardenas the Dade County State Committeeman’s post years ago.

Warm personal regards, Jack Thompson

PS: Enclosed is my Tyndale House book, Out of Harm’s Way, which explains what this is all about. Note the quotation by Stern on the cover of the book. As one Christian to another, enjoy it!

Copy: Al Cardenas
Sheila Tuma, The Florida Bar
Referee Dava Tunis
Media
U.S. District Court File, 07-21256, Southern District of Florida