Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
Censorship Entertainment Games

House Calls for Investigation Into Rockstar Games 215

Posted by Zonk
from the hot-coffee-of-the-undead dept.
Spad writes "The BBC is reporting that the U.S. House of Representatives has overwhelmingly voted for an FTC investigation into Rockstar Games following the GTA:SA 'Sex scandal'. Their basic premise is that Rockstar intentionally deceived the ESRB in order to 'peddle sexually explicit material to our youth'." Gamespot has coverage as well. From the BBC article: "The release of Grand Theft Auto: San Andreas was widely anticipated, but an adults-only rating would have severely limited its sales in retail outlets...It appears that the publisher has blatantly circumvented the rules in order to peddle sexually explicit material to our youth, and they should be held accountable. A company cannot be allowed to profit from deceit."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

House Calls for Investigation Into Rockstar Games

Comments Filter:
  • by Rolan (20257) * on Tuesday July 26, 2005 @11:20AM (#13166213) Homepage Journal
    The FTC has better things to do than become parents to all the nation's kids. This is just another election ploy by the house to get votes from the "conservative" and "religious" demographics.
    • by sgant (178166) on Tuesday July 26, 2005 @11:26AM (#13166307) Homepage Journal
      God, I only WISH the people from Rockstar get up there in front of the House and basically say "Screw you...we'll make anything we want and you idiots won't do anything about it...it's a fricken videogame people...now get back to work and stop wasting everyone's money with this crap. No, we don't apologize for anything and in fact the next Grand Theft Auto will feature 90% sex!" Then get up and walk out.
      • by Irish_Samurai (224931) on Tuesday July 26, 2005 @11:59AM (#13166728)
        Not only that, but throw this [yale.edu] into their face.

        If virtual child pornography, released under the guise that it is real is constitutionally protected - then you can most definitely show poorly rendered sex in a fictional setting.

        Also, the ESRB is a voluntary board, there is no regulation stating that a game has to be rated in order to be sold to the public. Any attempt to deceive the ESRB should be frowned upon by the Video Game development community, but nothing illegal was done. You can release a movie as NR without a problem, you can also release a game without a rating. This is not a place for the FTC to get involved.

        The thing to do would to eloquently write your congressman\congresswoman and your state reps and tell them what a crock of shit this is. Let them know that there are more important things to be making a spectacle of in the public eye, and that if these subjects are not addressed, we will use our combined intelligence and knowledge to prevent their re-election.

        • by Phisbut (761268) on Tuesday July 26, 2005 @12:53PM (#13167508)
          Also, the ESRB is a voluntary board, there is no regulation stating that a game has to be rated in order to be sold to the public. Any attempt to deceive the ESRB should be frowned upon by the Video Game development community, but nothing illegal was done.

          It's even worse than that...

          Their basic premise is that Rockstar intentionally deceived the ESRB in order to 'peddle sexually explicit material to our youth'

          ... to our youth? To our youth? It's rated Mature (17+), and it's peddling material to our fucking youth?!? I know those elders want to "stay young" as long as they can and want to consider themselves as still in their hip years, but someone who is 17 is anything buy in their "youth".

          Every definition of "youth" I can find refers to a period "before maturity". Therefore, if the ESRB considers 17+ to be Mature, Rockstar never tried to do anything to their youth.

          GAWD!!!

      • I only WISH the people from Rockstar get up there in front of the House and basically say "Screw you...we'll make anything we want and you idiots won't do anything about it...

        Funny, this is almost what William Gaines tried to do (abeit more modestly) when he defended E.C. Publications' "horror" comic books that came under attack after Dr. Wertham published a book lambasting "seduction" [wikipedia.org] in the media. The PR backlash from the public from Gaines' defense in Congress eventually set the comics industry back se

    • Seems to me a huge liberal, Hilary Clinton, got this ball rolling in NY state.
      • by BaudKarma (868193) on Tuesday July 26, 2005 @11:41AM (#13166506) Journal
        She's probably after the same voting bloc, though. If you accept the theory that she'll be running for president in 2008, she'll need to start moving closer to the middle. Jumping on the videogame bashing bandwagon is a good start.
      • Hilary Clinton is a liberal in the same sense that scientology is a religion
        • She is, however, a liberal in the sense that other liberals will vote for her.

          Unfortunately, that is all that will matter in the end.
          • She is, however, a liberal in the sense that other liberals will vote for her.

            No, Democrats will vote for her. Real liberals will laugh at her and vote Green, knowing that she'll win anyway.

            Hillary, Joe Lieberman, Tipper Gore, etc. are some of the most socially conservative politicians in the United States. Just because Rush calls them "libs" doesn't make it so.

            • Sadly, most Democrats I know call themselves liberal. All the people who want the living wage, free healthcare, no war in Iraq are planning to vote for Hillary, and all of them call themselves liberal.

              So it is not just Rush that calls them "libs"; they call themselves "libs". However, that still does not make them so, I guess.

              • Why don't we do ourselves a favor and label all politicians conservative.

                All this democrat/republican garbage is all the same nowadays. Mayor Ventura said... "We have 1 more choice than Iraq."

              • Because we have no choice. Its vote for her, and get someone who shows at least some of our political beliefs in office, or vote for a 3rd party and let Jeb Bush (or whoever runs) in instead. Its picking the lesser of two evils.
                • That is the same argument that got Bush elected. A lot of people in the Republican party hate Bush, but still vote for him, because he is the "lesser" of two evils.

                  Eventually this attitude will get us to the point where the only to options will be Bush from Republicans and Bush look-alike from the Democrats, and the only difference between them will be one will be against abortion, the other one for, and everyone will vote based on that alone.

                  Wait. We are pretty much already there. Sigh.
                  • At the moment we have no alternative. In local elections a 3rd party has a chance, at nationals they don't. You'd need to kill the electoral college and plurality voting. Until then, the lesser of two evils is better than a neo-con.
                    • Well, lets say a 3rd party did come along, and got 1 major state (or equivalent amount of individual votes without winner take all- say 20, approximately Illinois). Neither major candidate would be able to get a majority of the EC. The EC is not a plurality system, you *must* have a majority vote to win. The election would then go to the House of Representatives with 1 vote per state, as per the US Constitution. So whoever has a majority in the House (or can form an alliance with the minority 3rd party)
        • If history is any judge, Scientology will be a perfectly acceptable religion in another hundred years or so. Don't forget that Christianity too was once a really crazy wacked out cult to the majority of people. For those of us who reject religion, Christianity and Scientology don't seem all that different.
      • Seems to me a huge liberal, Hilary Clinton, got this ball rolling in NY state. Which has nothing to do with what I said. You think that a "huge liberal" doesn't want votes?
      • by badasscat (563442) <`basscadet75' `at' `yahoo.com'> on Tuesday July 26, 2005 @12:05PM (#13166827)
        Seems to me a huge liberal, Hilary Clinton, got this ball rolling in NY state.

        Except that Hillary Clinton is a Senator, and this was a vote in the House of Representatives.

        In fact, this resolution was introduced by a Republican congressman from Indiana. Here he is. [wndu.com]

        Hillary Clinton is just fishing for votes; this guy actually believes it's worth wasting real congressional workday hours on.
      • Its not a big secret that Kerry lost an election that many feel seemed to be unloseable.

        W's secret? A bunch of bible thumpers who vote for whoever Jesus tells them to.

        The democrats are just trying to grab an easy piece of the "right wing nutjob" pie. Hoping that if all candidates have the same view on morality, then theres actually a decision to make.
        • "W's secret? A bunch of bible thumpers who vote for whoever Jesus tells them to."

          W's real secret: have the republican-controlled state election board in ohio make it very hard for people in democratic leaning districts to cast their vote, by providing insufficient and unreliable voting machines to their districts.

          8 hour lines, anyone? In my well-off neighborhood, I only had to wait about 5 minutes.
      • Seems to me a huge liberal, Hilary Clinton, got this ball rolling in NY state.

        Now let's be fair...Hilary isn't anywhere near as big as was Monica. Oh...erm...you weren't talking about her physical size, were you?
    • Man, they've all been like that. It's an entire series of games all about doing illegal stuff, and shooting cops, "making use of" prostitutes, etc.

      It's been there since the first one, but nobody even lifted a finger -- government wise -- until now. It's been like three or four years.

      Wow.

      Luke
      ----
      Tired of answering tons of basic computer questions for friends and family? Send them to ChristianNerds.com [christiannerds.com] instead!
    • "Dammit, tell me where I can buy an old version of GTA-SA now?! Can't kill a person to get it now!!!!"
  • by jon787 (512497) on Tuesday July 26, 2005 @11:21AM (#13166226) Homepage Journal
    I said it before and I'll say it again, to be fair they should prosecute Maxis too! [google.com]
  • Let the witch hunt begin!
  • by pudding7 (584715) on Tuesday July 26, 2005 @11:21AM (#13166234)
    Shooting hookers
    Shooting cops
    Running over pedestrians
    Stealing cars
    Throwing grenades
    Stealing tanks and smushing old ladies
    Joyriding
    Speeding
    Killing hundreds, literally

    All ok.

    But how dare they show some cartoon boobie!
    • Re:I'll be first (Score:3, Insightful)

      by kinkos (789876)
      The parents comment seems to be the general consensus (at least in my area). But why does the FTC really need to investigate Rockstar? I'll bet $10 that the FTC spends thousands of dollars on an investigation, and their report ends up stating that hackers bypassed Rockstars reasonable protection against viewing said explicit material. Case closed, Rockstar never intentionally mislead anyone to get the M rating.
    • by kk49 (829669)
      Hey! Next time put up a spoiler warning.
    • All ok.

      Come on, all the GTA games (and particularly GTA III) have been subjected to intense criticism over the level of violence. I'm sure the same congressmen pushing for an investigation (which is asinie, btw) would decry the level of violence as well.

      The real question is what was Rockstar doing wasting their time making a lame minigame depicting simulated sex between fully clothed people? I would've expected more from them, frankly.

      • The real question is what was Rockstar doing wasting their time making a lame minigame depicting simulated sex between fully clothed people? I would've expected more from them, frankly.

        They probably just made it to see how it would work, then decided they couldn't get away with it and removed game path that led to this event. In light of the recent debacle, maybe they should have removed it altogether, but who would have there would be so much fuss about it? To top it off, it's a pretty innocent thing. I

    • by mindaktiviti (630001) on Tuesday July 26, 2005 @12:22PM (#13167080)

      And I'm not yelling at the parent because he probably knows, but I just want to get the point across loud and clear: THERE WAS NO BOOBIE ACTION!

      Fully clothe is what you got with that modification.

      Now, with a naked skin mod, only then do you get to see something, and those are community created, Rockstar did not create naked skins. So these fucking politicians are just using this as an excuse for something, and this entire fiasco has been completely over-blown.

      • In fact, the game features a mission where you rescue a hooker while she's being raped and murdered, and allows you to kill hookers with a chainsaw. That was OK, but the fact that you can modify the game to show fully clothed concensual sex is the big no-no.

        America is certifiably insane.
  • I guess they had to have SOMETHING for the press, though.

    There are a number of easier ways to get porn - most people wouldn't consider a video game quality porn, anyway.

    • most people wouldn't consider a video game quality porn, anyway.

      Right, it's just a novelty. (look for the hot coffee videos on eMule, they're funny but a one-trick pony) The politicians have to make a stink about EVIL SEX as a smoke screen to what's really important (deficit, unemployment, etc). I'm pretty liberal but Hillary Clinton is a useless cunt not worthy of cleaning my toilet.
  • Why don't you... (Score:5, Insightful)

    by HaloZero (610207) <`moc.liamg' `ta' `akedotorp'> on Tuesday July 26, 2005 @11:22AM (#13166244) Homepage
    Go, and play the game. Find the hot-coffee mod for yourself. Look at it. Then be ashamed, while games like Playboy: The Mansion, and XXX Volleyball are still on store shelves (rated M for Mature).

    Be very fucking ashamed at yourselves.
  • That's right... (Score:2, Insightful)

    by grub (11606)

    ...justify your comfy jobs by going after a video game maker. Ignore the fact that the evil sex bits needed some pretty fancy dancing to have them show up.

    Won't somebody think of the children?!

  • Adults only rating (Score:3, Insightful)

    by teksno (838560) on Tuesday July 26, 2005 @11:23AM (#13166260)
    the adults only rating should be used more often...

    its not used because it would mean that the 15 year old with his b-day $$ cant go but the latest gore spiller. if the rating was used more we might actually see parents take a larger intrest in what their kids are playing when the parent themselves has to buy the game vs the teenage kid.

    though it will still do nothing for the idiots that just buy what ever game their kid is begging for and let them play it regardless.
  • by Nos. (179609) <{ac.srrekeht} {ta} {werdna}> on Tuesday July 26, 2005 @11:25AM (#13166284) Homepage

    A game that depicts and rewards as much violence as the GTA series has, has missions where killing cops and civillians gains you status and money, and is generally about the rise to power of a crime lord, and they're worried about a sex scene that porn collectors wouldn't waste the time to download. Geez, priorities are out of whack.

    A company cannot be allowed to profit from deceit. So pick a relatively small company to go after, since the bigger ones are so much harder. You think Rockstar is the only or even one of the worst companies making money from deceit? Think again

    • A game that depicts and rewards as much violence as the GTA series has, has missions where killing cops and civillians gains you status and money, and is generally about the rise to power of a crime lord, and they're worried about a sex scene that porn collectors wouldn't waste the time to download. Geez, priorities are out of whack.

      Welcome to America, the land where violence is cool, but don't you dare show a bare nipple on TV...!

  • Our Great Leaders (Score:3, Insightful)

    by TopShelf (92521) on Tuesday July 26, 2005 @11:26AM (#13166300) Homepage Journal
    Here's a stupendous quote from the Honorable (guffaw!) Fred Upton, representative from Michigan:

    "It appears that the publisher has blatantly circumvented the rules in order to peddle sexually explicit material to our youth, and they should be held accountable. A company cannot be allowed to profit from deceit."

    Never mind that this title wasn't supposed to be sold to youths (17+), or that it already boasts loads of sexual and violent content.

    That said, the facts don't even matter here. Rockstar had a software quality SNAFU that is providing politicians a soapbox opportunity. Betcha those easter eggs will get fewer and farther between, eh?
    • Actually, my thought on that sentence - "A company cannot be allowed to profit from deceit.", is that it is actually OK to profit from deceit if you are an Oil company or Wall Street.
  • Double standard (Score:5, Insightful)

    by kawika (87069) on Tuesday July 26, 2005 @11:27AM (#13166321)
    "A company cannot be allowed to profit from deceit."

    A government or political party, on the other hand...
  • by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday July 26, 2005 @11:27AM (#13166325)
    Anyone remember that scandal about Karl Rove [google.com]? Leaking the name of a CIA agent?

    Doesn't the House have slightly more important things to be doing than starting an investigation against a video game?

    Someone in the White House may have placed individuals who gave intelligence at risk, breaking the law in the process. So Congress responsds by... INVESTIGATING TITTIES IN A VIDEO GAME!

    Yes, I know, not directly. It still seems like they're looking for something - anything - to replace Karl Rove with in the news.
  • by MattW (97290) <matt@ender.com> on Tuesday July 26, 2005 @11:29AM (#13166343) Homepage
    There's not really a mystery here. Rockstar put in a sex minigame. A hacker unlocked it. It was not accessible without a patch or hack, which probably violates the EULA.

    Also, what is the big deal here? The game was already rated 'M for Mature'; that's 17+, according to the ESRB. In a majority of states, you can already play the sex mini-game legally in real life. Is there some reason sex should be legal at 16 [ageofconsent.com], but a sex-themed video game should be illegal until you're 18?
  • by Crimsane (815761) <clarke@nullfs.com> on Tuesday July 26, 2005 @11:30AM (#13166359) Homepage
    Who remembers the old Rings of Power [gamespot.com] cheat that showed you the boobies on startup.

    For the good of /. and the public in general, I won't admit how much those boobies meant to me when I was 10, but I hope todays kids, all grown up, will think back and fondly remember the illicit gaming provided boobies, like I do rings of power.

    If anything, I say rockstar deserves a medal!
  • Slashdot (Score:5, Insightful)

    by MyLongNickName (822545) on Tuesday July 26, 2005 @11:31AM (#13166376) Journal
    Slashdot plays into the "bread and circuses" mentality that has gripped our nation for the past couple of decades. This is a real non-event designed to buy political karma for a select few, and drum up business for the folks on the other side of the argument.

    While our nation continues to decline in its engineering education, falling behind "second world" nations, we focus on the nerd version of "Entertainment Weekly". Fortune had a wonderful article talking about this, and what the U.S. must do if it wants to stay #1... their focus was on engineering (imagine that... business folks recognizing the need for engineers).

    Will we see this type of article on Slashdot? No. But will we see more articles like this one? Yup. Will we see stories on what breakfast cereal Google endorses? Probably.

    Mod down accordingly.
    Don't get me wrong, we need articles of all types to make the "Slashdot salad" complete. But it seems this site ignores articles that really make you think, and go for the gratuitous knee-jerk articles instead.
    • Anyone else feel that the slashdot salad/omlette is just a weak excuse/justification to handpick stories which generate knee-jerk reactions and thus creating more ad revenue?

      Hey! Look! There is Microsoft leaving Google off the map!
  • by GTRacer (234395) <gtracer308@yah o o . com> on Tuesday July 26, 2005 @11:32AM (#13166385) Homepage Journal
    GTA:SA is rated either M or AO, meaning 17+ in the USA.

    If anyone UNDER 17 is playing a copy obtained by an underage person, the system failed.

    If anyone UNDER 17 is playing a copy obtained by a "legal" of-age person, then that person is presumably guilty of contributing to delinquency or somesuch (IANAL).

    As far as I know, Hot Coffee is only accessible through an extra, non-in-game process in any version. Source mod, cheat code, etc. Therefore, anyone accessing Hot Coffee is doing so in circumvention of the standard game code.

    Now, after ALL THAT, here's what I want to know...why isn't Hot Coffee (and M-rated gaming in general) treated like drinking? If I drink too muck and then "manslaughter" someone, do I get to finger Corona? No!

    In addition to GTA, I'm currently enjoying BloodRayne 2. I'm really enjoying the feeding fatalities. But if I go and slice up some poor schmoe, am I going to sue Majesco or Terminal Reality? No!

    What happened to adults taking personal responsibility for their own actions? I should be smart enough and responsible enough to know when I'm taking *any* vice too far. Games, sex, drugs, speeding, etc.

    GTRacer
    - Pleased that Rayne is more or less realistically proportioned, unlike Lara

    • One pretty important fact your argument seems to have missed- ESRB ratings are not "laws" in that their recommendations are not enforced by any government agency and that a child who the recommendations say should not play the game is not guilty of anything and providing them to children is no more a crime than giving them R-rated movies. They are supposed to be enforced by parents aware of their childrens' purchases. The system fails when parents don't bother to acquire this awareness or try to prevent the
  • by xythis (882089) on Tuesday July 26, 2005 @11:34AM (#13166429)


    I'm writing because Rockstar Games North is at the center of the future. The Hot Coffee Mod has propelled you to the front lines of the culture wars. For many hundreds of years, crafty and selfish politicians have used the empty and meaningless phrase "family values" to enrage an otherwise apathetic public and solidify their power.

    The most recent self-aggrandizing political power-monger to attempt a power grab by denigrating the invented enemies of children and the family is Hillary Clinton. How hypocritical for a woman whose own family life is a public embarrassment to now attack a supposed enemy of the family. But of course it's no coincidence - it is precisely because her own family life is a joke that she must become a defender of the family. For what better way to advance her political career?

    You have a choice. Rockstar Games North has created the most aesthetically important piece of art since Andy Warhol was alive. Never in the history of the narrative form has a piece encouraged with such audacity the audience's identification with an anti-social character. And yet, it's a hit. Grand Theft Auto is one of the most popular video game series of all time. The question people should be asking is why do so many people dream of being an outlaw in their personal life rather than what effect this piece of art is having on our children.

    Then again, the outlaw has been a staple of the narrative form ever since the inception of the story. Men have always thrilled to tales of the criminal, the social deviant, and the outlaw. Obviously, part of the attacks on Grand Theft Auto are spurred by an anti-technological bias. It's likely that many who criticize have never even played a video game. It's even more likely that those who criticize have never played through a single game of Grand Theft Auto.

    Many criticisms are based on single, isolated elements of the game, and yet where's the criticism of the game as a whole? Criticizing GTA for a single element is like criticizing Huckleberry Finn or The Catcher in the Rye for a single word.

    The suggestion that Grand Theft Auto could somehow harm children is laughable. How is it possible for a video game to nullify the effects of poverty, racial discrimination, lack of opportunity, and - most importantly - the natural slights children experience as a result of interacting with other children? It's not possible. And for someone to suggest that a video game has a greater influence than any of these effects, combined or individually, on the personality of a growing child, is ridiculous. Your company is being attacked and demonized by individuals and organizations concerned only with increasing their own power. Clinton's and other groups' intentions are naked, obvious, and reprehensible.

    How many of us experienced violent content in art while growing up? How many of us experienced sexual content while growing up? Almost all of us. The Bible itself is full of violence and sex. Yet most of us are law-abiding citizens. In fact, I believe if the GTA audience were researched, we'd find that they are less likely to commit a crime than the general population. How likely is someone to be a criminal when they have the tenacity to make it through a 40+ hour narrative? How likely are they to be a criminal if imaginary anti-social acts satisfy them?

    You need to break yourselves off from Take Two and fight the good fight. You're established now. GTA will always sell. You can make other games that push the boundaries of the art form. And, if you follow this road, you'll have no competition. Almost all other companies will be cowed and scared.

    Good luck. I hope you decide to fight.
  • by TheLink (130905) on Tuesday July 26, 2005 @11:38AM (#13166471) Journal
    US politicians saying that "a company cannot be allowed to profit from deceit"?

    What next? Investigations into where all the money actually went in Iraq? Go do a search for: budget audit iraq.

    "CPA staff identified at one ministry that although 8,206 guards were on the payroll, only 602 guards could be validated," the audit report states. "Consequently, there was no assurance funds were not provided for ghost employees."

    If all the US people are bothered about is "sex scenes" in computer games, they really have skewed priorities.

    Please stop drinking the kool-aid.

    Hmm, maybe it's all the thimerosal in the vaccines - so lots of people nowadays have damaged brains and so can't really think straight?
  • The quoted text in TFA wasn't from the BBC. It was Congressman Fred Upton of Michigan, who was being quoted by the BBC. There is a difference, you know.

    /me wanders off, muttering darkly about journalistic standards. Meh. Who am I kidding? This is Slashdot.

  • by Anonymous Coward
    Congress has no power to regulate videogames
  • The mod is less explicit than some TV commercials!

    Anyone playing this game is killing in the most hard-core sense of the word, selling drugs, beating up whores, yada, yada, yada....

    Man these people need to get a grip.
  • by gullevek (174152) on Tuesday July 26, 2005 @11:43AM (#13166534) Homepage Journal
    Yes, thats fine. Lets see.

    GTA 1: Run over people, kill them with guns, run big tanks into police building to kill cops. Kick people out of their cars, or shoot them, to steal their car. Violence: very high, Sex: none -> okay

    GTA 2: same with little bit better graphics. Violence: Very high, Sex: none -> okay

    GTA now: semi-realistic 3D graphics. Kill, shoot, rob, destroy, explode, etc. Violence: Very hight, Sex: one dry hump -> CATSROPHY.

    In my opinion. American FCC makes itself a world wide joke. Seriously. Nobody here outside of America takes them serious and the bad thing is, nobody takes the rest of America serious either anymore thanks to those FCC & religious idiots. Great work, how some stupid sex-hating maniacs can do damage. Actually this is just something, where I can make fun of my American co-workers at office.

    I think they need to get laid. NOW. Right now ... Seriously ... they would work then on world peace ... or fighting hunger, poverty ... or ice cream that melts in the mouth and not in the hand.
    • You are confusing FTC and FCC. FCC has no jursidiction in this case. FTC has minimal, and can only go after things like "truth in advertisement" violation in this case.

      I think they need to get laid. NOW. Right now ... Seriously ... they would work then on world peace ... or fighting hunger, poverty ... or ice cream that melts in the mouth and not in the hand.
      I sure hope that FCC is not going to work on this. They will not solve those things, and they have plenty of other work on their hands, like equipme
  • by Percent Man (756972) on Tuesday July 26, 2005 @11:52AM (#13166632) Homepage
    "A company cannot be allowed to profit from deceit."

    The US Government said that? With a straight face?
  • by Tyrsenus (858934) on Tuesday July 26, 2005 @12:01PM (#13166767)
    Those who have opposed the GTA series for its violence are now simply using "hot coffee" to promote their agenda.

    There are multitudes of people who wanted GTA banned or censored, but could not before because it was under the shield of the "17+" rating.

    Now that it has been found that some sexual, "18+" content has been found in a normally inaccessable part of the game, those people can (perhaps rightfully) claim that this content is illegal due to the fact that sexual content was sold to minors.

    What needs to be stated by the ESRB is what exactly is meant by a game rating. Do ratings reflect what is shown in normal parts of game play, or does it include easter eggs as well? What about content that is put in the final version but is only accessable by using mods, such as hot coffee?

    Most kids that would actually be "corrupted" by the kind of content in hot coffee are too young and not smart enough to hack into a computer game to find it. Putting inaccessable adult content in a game for minors is like giving a kid a safe with a porno mag inside and no combination.

    I don't think this needs a federal investigation, as this path may lead to censorship. The ESRB even said that this mess is over.
  • by Muad'Dave (255648) on Tuesday July 26, 2005 @12:04PM (#13166799) Homepage

    A company cannot be allowed to profit from deceit."

    Because Congress has the monopoly on profiting from deceit.

  • Deceit (Score:2, Insightful)

    > "A company cannot be allowed to profit from deceit."

    What about politicians?
  • They came for the palmists,
    but I wasn't a palmist
    so I did nothing.
    They came for the bungee jumpers,
    but I wasn't a bungee jumper
    so I did nothing.
    They came for the players' agents,
    but I wasn't a players' agent
    so I did nothing.
    They came for the Charles Manson fans,
    but I wasn't a Charles Manson fan,
    so i did nothing.
    They came for the refloxoligists,
    but I wasn't a refloxoligist
    so I did nothing.
    They came for the camp TV chefs,
    but I wasn't a camp TV chef
    so I did nothing
    They came for the Romos,
    I laughed.
    They came fo
  • Usually when I peddle something, I try to get it to other people. As opposed to, say, taking steps to prevent people from getting it. I shouldn't own any illegal firearms, but if somebody breaks into my home and steals them from me, does that make me an illegal weapons dealer because I should have put stronger locks on my doors? Rockstar at least tried to BS their way out of this. The House is blatantly lying.
  • So, I hope this has upset you as much as it upsets me. Reading that sniveling worm of a politician's thoughts on GTA and how they are trying to peddle smut to the kiddies makes me want to vomit. And I don't even like GTA!

    Does anyone have a good site that we could use to write people involved in this "investigation"? Perhaps someone could draft a nice form letter we could all use?
  • And by "them" I mean the idiot politicians. And by "book" I mean "a shelf full of steamy romance novels bought by a 10 year old at the local used book shop, goodwill, salvation army, etc."

    On the other hand, I'm looking at this and going, "female Zardoz"? "The gun is good the boobie is evil"?
  • Is this a legal or moral position?

    Let's just pass a law to this effect, and we should be fine.
  • by tepp (131345) on Tuesday July 26, 2005 @01:41PM (#13168166)
    I went and found the list of those who voted for this.

    So far, on the us house page, I've found this:

    7:22 P.M. - ONE MINUTE SPEECHES - The House proceeded with one minute speeches.

    H. Res. 376: expressing the sense of the House of Representatives that the Federal Trade Commission should investigate the publication of the video game "Grand Theft Auto: San Andreas" to determine if the publisher intentionally deceived the Entertainment Software Ratings Board to avoid an "Adults-Only" rating

    The title of the measure was amended. Agreed to without objection.

    Motion to reconsider laid on the table Agreed to without objection.

    On motion to suspend the rules and agree to the resolution, as amended Agreed to by the Yeas and Nays: (2/3 required): 355 - 21, 1 Present (Roll no. 419).

    This leads to this roll call:

    http://clerk.house.gov/evs/2005/roll419.xml [house.gov]

    Which states that 195 republicans voted yes, 2 voted nay. 159 democrats voted yes, 19 voted nay. 1 independant voted nay.

    In other words, it wasn't even a contested vote.

    The full list of those who voted yay follows:

    Ackerman Aderholt Akin Alexander Allen Andrews Baca Baird Baker Baldwin Barrett (SC) Barrow Bartlett (MD) Barton (TX) Bass Beauprez Berry
    Biggert Bilirakis Bishop (GA) Bishop (NY) Blackburn Blunt Boehlert Boehner Bonilla Bonner Bono Boozman Boren Boswell Boucher Boustany Boyd Bradley (NH) Brady (PA) Brady (TX) Brown (OH) Brown (SC) Burgess Burton (IN) Butterfield Calvert Camp Cantor Capito Capps Capuano Cardin Cardoza Carnahan Carson Carter Case Castle Chabot Chandler Chocola Cleaver Clyburn Coble Conaway Cooper Costa Cox Crenshaw Crowley Cubin Cuellar Culberson Cummings Davis (AL) Davis (CA) Davis (IL) Davis (KY) Davis (TN) Davis, Jo Ann Davis, Tom Deal (GA) DeFazio DeGette DeLauro DeLay Dent Diaz-Balart, L. Dicks Dingell Doggett Doyle Drake Dreier Duncan Edwards Ehlers Emanuel Emerson Engel English (PA) Eshoo Etheridge Evans Everett Farr Ferguson Filner Fitzpatrick (PA) Foley Forbes Ford Fortenberry Foxx Franks (AZ) Frelinghuysen Garrett (NJ) Gerlach Gilchrest Gillmor Gingrey Gohmert Gonzalez Goode Goodlatte Gordon Granger Graves Green (WI) Green, Al Green, Gene Gutknecht Hall Harman Harris Hart Hastings (WA) Hayes Hayworth Hefley Hensarling Herger Herseth Higgins Hinchey Hoekstra Holden Holt Honda Hooley Hoyer Hunter Hyde Inglis (SC) Inslee Israel Issa Jackson (IL) Jackson-Lee (TX) Jindal Johnson (CT) Johnson (IL) Johnson, Sam Jones (NC) Kanjorski Kaptur Keller Kelly Kennedy (MN) Kennedy (RI) Kildee Kind King (IA) Kingston Kirk Kline Knollenberg Kolbe Kucinich Kuhl (NY) LaHood Langevin Lantos Larsen (WA) Larson (CT) Latham LaTourette Leach Levin Lewis (CA) Lewis (KY) Lipinski LoBiondo Lofgren, Zoe Lowey Lucas Lungren, Daniel E. Lynch Mack Maloney Manzullo Marchant Markey Marshall Matheson Matsui McCarthy McCaul (TX) McCollum (MN) McCotter McCrery McGovern McHenry McHugh McIntyre McKeon McKinney McMorris McNulty Meehan Meek (FL) Meeks (NY) Melancon Menendez Mica Michaud Millender-McDonald Miller (FL) Miller (NC) Miller, Gary Miller, George Mollohan Moore (KS) Moore (WI) Moran (KS) Moran (VA) Murphy Musgrave Myrick Nadler Napolitano Neal (MA) Neugebauer Ney Northup Norwood Nunes Oberstar Olver Osborne Otter Oxley Pallone Pascrell Pastor Pearce Pence Peterson (MN) Peterson (PA) Petri Pickering Pitts Platts Poe Pombo Pomeroy Porter Price (GA) Price (NC) Putnam Ramstad Rangel Regula Rehberg Reichert Renzi Reynolds Rogers (AL) Rogers (KY) Rogers (MI) Rohrabacher Ros-Lehtinen Ross Roybal-Allard Royce Ruppersberger Ryan (OH) Ryan (WI) Ryun (KS) Sabo Salazar Sánchez, Linda T. Sanchez, Loretta Sanders Saxton Schakowsky Schiff Schwartz (PA) Schwarz (MI) Scott (GA) Scott (VA) Sensenbrenner Sessions Shadegg Shaw Sherman Sherwood Shimkus Shuster Simmons Simpson Skelton Slaughter Smith (NJ) Smith (TX) Smith (WA) Snyder Solis Spratt Stearns Stupak Sullivan Tancredo Tanner Tauscher Taylor (MS) Taylor (NC) Thomas Tho
  • Seeing as how they sold 34 million copies BEFORE the Hot Coffee was even known about, how could this have been done for "profit"?!?

    If they had leaked it, maybe, if they had leaked it or it had been known as soon as it hit game store shelves, ok, but 6+ months after release and someone hacked/exploited the code to get it to work!?!?

    How is this some evil plan of Rockstar's?

As in certain cults it is possible to kill a process if you know its true name. -- Ken Thompson and Dennis M. Ritchie

Working...