Surprisingly Few People Collect On GTA Hot Coffee

Relin writes "Out of the millions eligible, less than 3,000 have come forward to collect their money in the 'Hot Coffee' settlement. While the plaintiffs' lawyer is surprised by the development, Theodore Frank of the Legal Center for the Public Interest at the American Enterprise Institute seems convinced that the lawsuit was 'meritless' and will result in no payment for the legal counsel opposing Take-Two."

Any surprise?

[Kinky Bass Junk]

It's $5

Take Two owes more in legal fees

[mo]

TFA states that the attorneys that brought the case are demanding 1.3 million in legal fees, way more than the 2,676 * (max $35) = $93,660 settlement fees that Take Two will have to pay.

Re:Not surprised

[corsec67]

One minor correction to your post, although I agree with all of it:
There is no nudity in the Hot Coffee [wikipedia.org] minigame as it was on the disc.

Re:The only people benefiting.

[Anonymous Psychopath]

Settling should not be an option for class action lawsuits. The client/s should decide whether to settle, not the lawyer/s. A settlement should always be an opt-in, not an opt-out.

One can always choose to litigate individually if they do not like the way the class action is handled.

Re:The only people benefiting.

[v(*_*)vvvv]

Ya, that is what the class action lawsuit pamphlets always say.

"It's taken 5 years and 10 million dollars in lawyer fees to get this far, and good news, we won, and you get free Mortgage coupons! To opt out you may write the court judge at {address}."

Ya, I am going to go after Bank of America individually. That is really a feasible option. Let me look up a lawyer in the phone book.

Hell no.

Class action lawsuits are for lawyers, and the wrong-doers settle to make them go away. It is never about the victims. Ever.

Re:mcdonald's

[Anonymous Coward]

There are plenty of ladders available for less than $25. Does it cost a negative amount to manufacture and ship the things? I doubt it.

Re:mcdonald's

[KGIII]

Actually a little reading/education will go a long ways in this discussion. The suit vs. McDonald's was legitimate though the jury-awarded amount was a bit extreme. Do some research and you'll see why she lost the lawsuit. (Hint: 700+ prior cases of injury, third degree burns requiring skin grafts and stuff, the judge lowered the punitive damages to less than $500,000 USD, and the elderly lady who was burned was burned a second time when the corporation didn't want to pay only her medical bills and they became the first and only people that she sued.) I realize that people love to point to that particular lawsuit and make fun of it but the reality is a lot different than most people are aware. Her suit was legitimate.

Re:My hipocracy only goes so far...

[Anonymous Coward]

I thought cool, free money. Although I don't know if I will get it because I got GTA online from EB and the receipt they sent had no cash amount. Most of the offers they had required you to send in your copy of GTA for a new one and money. I'm sure that had something to do with it.

Re:odd

[Sigma 7]

Suppose I bought some porn video and there was a code that my kids found that let them play a game where they beat people and ran them over for fun. Would I have case?

No, since North America treats violence as equivalant to a recommended 17+ 'M' rating, while porn uses a strict 18+ 'AO' rating. Maybe something could happen in another country, but it's doubtful said rating system varies like that.

There would be a case (a minor one) if you include 18+ 'AO' content in the 17+ 'M' game. Aside from breaching the contract with the ESRB, it's also implying that the game itself was safe enough for parents to buy for the children they believed could properly handle the 17+ rating. (Remember: The ESRB states 'M' rated games are suitable for people aged 17+, and does not exclude 16-year-olds. The 'AO' rating is much more strict. )

Re:Not surprised

[rm999]

I somehow doubt a list of people who bought the best selling video game of all time (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Grand_Theft_Auto:_San_Andreas#Sales) - with 22 million sales - would generate much buzz online. I think GTA is far less controversial than the media wants us to believe; for every Jack Thompson/vocal-overprotective mom out there, 50,000 people bought the game.

Re:mcdonald's

[idlemind]

The suit was not legitimate. If it were, do you think companies today would still be serving coffee at the same scalding temperature? No, they would not.

I have looked into this case a lot and I once shared your view. Check out overlawyered.com if you genuinely want more insight. http://overlawyered.com/2005/10/urban-legends-and-stella-liebeck-and-the-mcdonalds-coffee-case/ [overlawyered.com] It is alluring to think the common sense answer is wrong but in this case it is not. Keep in mind that trial lawyers have a vested interest in making you think this case was legit.

Thanks for your time.

Re:Not surprised

[jfclavette]

I'm sorry, the game is called Grand Theft Auto and the box art is rather informative. I mean, If it had been called Brokeback Fountains, and the box had depicted dressed women wearing suggestive clothing, would you also have excused her for not paying attention to the rating ?

Re:The only people benefiting.

[sjames]

There has to be at least a minimal amount of paperwork. For example, members of the class have the right to refuse to take part in the settlement. They may do that on ethical grounds because they don't agree with the suit or because they prefer to sue individually (perhaps they don't feel that the class-action adequately stated the case or they believe they were harmed to a greater extent than other members of the class.

Meanwhile, accepting the settlement generally requires a formal legal agreement that the settlement closes the matter.

Re:Any surprise?

[Wavicle]

No, you should not do that. RTFA.

The best thing you can do is DO NOTHING AT ALL.

Take Two may have the suit declared without merit because of extremely small response, in which case the defense lawyers will be unable to collect legal fees.

Re:Any surprise?

[DustyShadow]

in which case the defense lawyers will be unable to collect legal fees

I think you mean the plaintiff's lawyers?

Re:Not surprised

[potat0man]

I think you also needed the original receipt or some proof of purchase. I remember going to the website to look into it when the decision was announced and there was something required like that. Frankly, I'm surprised 3,000 people had that lying around 3+ years after the game came out.

Re:My hipocracy only goes so far...

[Koiu Lpoi]

I had so much hope for our species.

Your problem is assuming Western, and specifically US Conservative culture is the norm for humanity.

"On DISC" controversy

[DrYak]

There is no nudity in the Hot Coffee [wikipedia.org] minigame as it was on the disc.

The whole controversy spanned from the fact that there's still traces of nudity (partially implemented and very buggy) on the disc.
The minigame play as "out-of-the-box" didn't have nudity. But some fragments of the necessary file where still around.

The whole constroversy was around this.
Paranoid parents complaining that the files where shipped on the disc (even if unaccessible and part broken)
Take-two defending themselves that the rating is on who the game is played (and nudity isn't normally accessed during game play).

Re:Not surprised

[residieu]

There were some clueless parents who were offended. But they probably didn't understand that you had to mod the game to get the content. In a ny times article [nytimes.com] on the subject one mother says "I'm aware that there is killing in the game," Ms. Stanhouse said in the deposition. "I wasn't aware of the stealing." She wasn't aware there was stealing in a game called "Grand THEFT Auto"

Re:Hot Coffee PG-rated

[AciDeX]

I played the PC version of GTA:SA with the hot coffee setting turned on and I could not believe such a fuss was created about something so innocuous. In case anyone doesn't know, there's about 5 seconds of sex taking place INSIDE a house (with the camera showing the outside of the house), I was expecting graphic nudity given the amount of controversy. So this was merely about the fact that sex takes place in the game than any actual depiction of it.

That was the original "included" content... The "Hot Coffee" controversy is experienced by downloading and installing a patch file that enables the camera an "inside" view of the house and a mini-game that involved moving the analog sticks in a "rythmic" way.

Re:Any surprise?

[Rip!ey]

Take Two may have the suit declared without merit because of extremely small response, in which case the defense lawyers will be unable to collect legal fees.

If the suit was declared "without merit", wouldn't the legal counsel opposing Take-Two be required to cover legal fees for all parties concerned rather than simply "not collect"?

I was one of the claimants

[Harlequin]

Unfortunately, it was not made clear that there was any option that this suit could be declared meritless or I wouldn't have put in my claim. When I saw that the class action had been settled for a fixed sum of money that Rockstar would end up paying regardless of my submitting a claim or not, I decided the best thing I could do would be to make my claim and then buy GTA4 with that money.

Since I didn't particularly agree with the reasons for the suit, I would have foregone the money if I'd known it would hurt the case of those who submitted it.

However, the settlement was not just $5 across the board. You can view details at the settlement site (http://gtasettlement.com/) but if you had proof of purchase (like I did), the offer was $35.