Rockstar Wins "GTA Rothbury" Libel Case

October 4, 2010 -

Earlier this summer the UK’s Daily Star fabricated a story claiming that the next entry in Rockstar’s Grand Theft Auto series would be based on the July 2010 crime spree committed by ex-con Raoul Moat (pictured)across the NorthEast section of the UK and that the game would be named GTA Rothbury.

While the paper later apologized for the incident, and the piece’s author insulted gamers, calling them “grown (?!?) men who sit around all day playing computer games with one another,” the paper has been ordered to pay undisclosed damages to Rockstar and Take Two Interactive. According to the Guardian, Rockstar has accepted “substantial” libel damages as awarded by a High Court.

Rockstar’s Solicitor, Melanie Hart, stated, “The defendant now accepts that Rockstar Games never had any intention to create such a video game at any time. The story was entirely false.”

The Daily Mail’s parent company, Express Newspapers, was also ordered to pay Rockstar’s legal fees.

An Express Newspapers spokesperson said that the company “accepted that the allegations were untrue and apologised for the upset and damage caused.”

MCVUK still has a screenshot of the original Daily Star article available on its website.


Comments

Re: Rockstar Wins "GTA Rothbury" Libel Case

It is good that the Daily Star has been effectively fined over this false story. They should check there facts. I personally would not like to see the original journalist handed the fine, as I do believe that the paper has to except responsibility as it decided to run with the story, but I do hope that his name is somewhat blackened.

He made up the story, but what was worse was that he was completely unrepentant over it, in journalism that is the worst thing you can do. The fact that he was so childish over the matter just showed what a hack he was. I hope all publications think twice before employing him or paying for his "stories".

Re: Rockstar Wins "GTA Rothbury" Libel Case

Well, now I want a copy of Red Dead Redemption even more.

As for the author, well, I doubt he's an author with them any more.

Re: Rockstar Wins "GTA Rothbury" Libel Case

First off, yes, congratulations to Rockstar for finally defending itself.

Though, "The defendant now accepts that Rockstar Games never had any intention to create such a video game at any time. The story was entirely false.” Just now? I think they should give them some credit, the Daily Star did write a redaction and apology within a week:

http://www.gamepolitics.com/2010/07/26/daily-star-apologizes-fabricating...

Overall I'm surprised at how well they've been dealing with this thing, other than publishing the thing in the first place. But that makes it all the more upsetting that the dumbass who actually wrote the story is seemingly getting off scot free. He should be fired and never be able to get a job in the industry again. This is disgraceful.

Re: Rockstar Wins "GTA Rothbury" Libel Case

I don't know about the Daily Star, but I if did something stupid that cost my company libel losses plus legal fees, I'm pretty sure they wouldn't even bother with cardboard boxes. They'd just roll my desk with all my stuff out the nearest window. And I'm on the second floor.

This guy being fired after this (if he hasn't already been) is almost a given. Companies just don't usually announce HR decisions like that, for CYA. As far as never getting another job in the industry... Nobody who actually looks at his background as an applicant is ever going to hire him as a writer. After the screaming liability of "I caused my company to lose a ton of money in a lawsuit," he'll probably have problems finding jobs in other, completely unrelated industries.

But, then again, that's what happens when you're an idiot.

Re: Rockstar Wins "GTA Rothbury" Libel Case

I think you overestimate the journalistic standards of the British press.  If he's fired (and even that's not a given), he'll find some other rag which will scold him and tell him to be more vague the next time he wants to make up a story.

Re: Rockstar Wins "GTA Rothbury" Libel Case

About damn time there were some consequences for all the cheap shots taken at us.

Here's to the rag known as the Daily Mail going down the tubes.

EDIT: Sorry, that's Daily Star, not "Mail". Though they are the same thing, really.

Re: Rockstar Wins "GTA Rothbury" Libel Case

I´m very glad they won. I hope this inspire many other companies that are being slandered by oportunistic pricks like the Daily Star.

I´m so buying a Rockstar game this week, lol (probably not).

------------------------------------------------------------ My DeviantArt Page (aka DeviantCensorship): http://www.darkknightstrikes.deviantart.com

Re: Rockstar Wins "GTA Rothbury" Libel Case

It's Jerry Lawton who should have to pay this totally out of pocket.  Daily Star should have verified it, sure.  But Lawton was the individual who made the false claims.

Nightwng2000

NW2K Software

http://www.facebook.com/nightwing2000

Nightwng2000 is now admin to the group "Parents For Education, Not Legislation" on MySpace as http://groups.myspace.com/pfenl

Nightwng2000 NW2K Software http://www.facebook.com/nightwing2000 Nightwng2000 is now admin to the group "Parents For Education, Not Legislation" on MySpace as http://groups.myspace.com/pfenl

Re: Rockstar Wins "GTA Rothbury" Libel Case

I don't know how the law goes in Britain, but in the US, that would qualify as a work of corporate authorship; Lawton may have technically written it, but for all legal purposes the publisher wrote it.

There could hypothetically be a clause in the contract saying the author has responsibility, but it would be simpler just to fire him.

Re: Rockstar Wins "GTA Rothbury" Libel Case

Personally, I would rather see the jerk who wrote the article lose his job. 

Now, if only the entire industry had half the stones R*/TT has, then perhaps they would be better suited to fight that California law.

Re: Rockstar Wins "GTA Rothbury" Libel Case

He cost the publication he works, or posibly worked for thousands, so he probably has lost his job.

Re: Rockstar Wins "GTA Rothbury" Libel Case

This kind of thing should be career/business ending.  I hope the damages were REALLY high.

------- Morality has always been in decline. As you get older, you notice it. When you were younger, you enjoyed it.

Re: Rockstar Wins "GTA Rothbury" Libel Case

Moreover, even the Daily Star reproduced the press release published by The Guardian : http://www.dailystar.co.uk/posts/view/156810/Paper-sorry-for-Moat-game-c...

Meanwhile, Jerry Lawton tries and tries hard : http://www.dailystar.co.uk/posts/view/155632/Raoul-Moat-the-play-Lotto-f...

Re: Rockstar Wins "GTA Rothbury" Libel Case

Finally, FINALLY, some game makers who have enough balls to defend their creation against libels all by THEMSELVES.

But what happened to the paper author ? Has he been sued too ? Because he would be the first one to deserve it.

Re: Rockstar Wins "GTA Rothbury" Libel Case

Congrats on winning the case Rockstar!

http://www.magicinkgaming.com/

 
Forgot your password?
Username :
Password :

Poll

Will Target Australia sell the next GTA game upon its release?:

Shout box

You're not permitted to post shouts.
MechaCrashNo, IP is trying to dehumanize you, I'm just pointing out that you're a hypocrit who makes bad faith arguments.08/01/2015 - 11:56am
Andrew EisenAnd I'm off too. Play nice, y'all!08/01/2015 - 11:33am
Andrew EisenIn short, discussions of ethics in journalism? Totally fine. Said indie dev's sex life? Not okay.08/01/2015 - 11:31am
james_fudgeTry talking when you have hundreds of people tweeting at you at the same time :)08/01/2015 - 11:30am
Andrew EisenAnd yet, when 30-seconds of research showed that there was no relevance to said indie dev's sex life, many people kept talking about. Hell, still do to this day. I had a guy on Twitter pester me about this nonsense for an entire day last weekend.08/01/2015 - 11:30am
james_fudgeWhatever dude, you're here posting. No one's stopping you.08/01/2015 - 11:30am
Goth_SkunkBe advised: In approximately 30 minutes I'm heading out of town for an obligatory family reunion. This is being stated so that none can interpret my upcoming 24 hour hiatus as a tail-tucking turn from discussion.08/01/2015 - 11:28am
Goth_SkunkEven now, IronPatriot, MechaCrash, and Craig R. continue to attempt to shout me down and dehumanize me.08/01/2015 - 11:25am
Goth_SkunkWhat transpired afterwards was a concerted effort to shout down and dehumanize those trying to bring these matters out into the open. I remain utterly convinced of this to this day.08/01/2015 - 11:24am
Goth_SkunkAnd yet the sex life of this indie developer tied right into the matter of journalistic ethics, as investigations uncovered a great number of breaches of ethical conduct, both related & not. That scandal is the orifice from which the balloon is inflated.08/01/2015 - 11:20am
MechaCrashI am reminded of the saying about playing chess with a pigeon.08/01/2015 - 11:13am
Andrew EisenThis is supported by, well, what actually happened, but also the text of the actual leaks. That was Tito's question and what he and a few (four total, I think) were discussing.08/01/2015 - 11:11am
Andrew EisenNo, it's not. What was generally prohibited was not discussion of journalistic ethics or other GamerGate topics, but threads that were, for example, discussing the sex life of an indie developer. THOSE are what were locked and removed.08/01/2015 - 11:10am
Goth_SkunkI don't believe you. Not for a second. Every major site with the exception of the Escapist prohibited discussion of GamerGate in its early stages. That is a fact.08/01/2015 - 11:04am
Andrew EisenNo, that's a fact. Don't believe me, read 'em yourself. No one was trying to censor discussion of GamerGate.08/01/2015 - 11:02am
Goth_Skunk@Andrew: That's your opinion.08/01/2015 - 10:57am
Goth_Skunkfuture? I'd compensate you for your time, of course.08/01/2015 - 10:57am
Goth_Skunk@IronPatriot: Congratulations on a sweeping statement to remove the agency of people supporting GamerGate for their own individual reasons. Since you're so good at painting in such broad strokes, are you free to paint my apartment sometime in the near08/01/2015 - 10:57am
Andrew EisenWhich, as you can tell by actually reading the snippets that were leaked, is a shamefully disingenuous telling of what was actually said.08/01/2015 - 10:56am
Goth_SkunkAdditionally, to quote William Usher, "[s]ome of the members on that list actively used their platform to support and propagate a wide-sweeping media narrative based on lies and factual inaccuracies."08/01/2015 - 10:54am
 

Be Heard - Contact Your Politician