Follow Slashdot stories on Twitter

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
×
The Courts Games

Take-Two Faces $20 Million Settlement For "Hot Coffee" Scandal 124

eldavojohn writes "Take-Two has settled with shareholders to the tune of $20 million dollars over the 'Hot Coffee' debacle. Ars brings the details on how a badly-handled situation resulted in shareholders suing Take-Two. '[The scandal] led to a media panic because it was assumed the sexual content was easy for children to get to (it wasn't) or that sex themes were becoming common in games (they aren't). Still, the lawsuit shows how badly the company bungled the situation, and it's easy to see how Take-Two's management directly caused shareholders to lose money. ... The suit alleged far more than a single misstep with Hot Coffee, however. "Take-Two's management was not cooperating or assisting with the Company's audit committee and was failing to keep the Board of Directors informed of important issues or failing to do so in a timely fashion," the complaint stated. Inventory was misstated, as was software development costs."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Take-Two Faces $20 Million Settlement For "Hot Coffee" Scandal

Comments Filter:
  • Comment removed (Score:4, Interesting)

    by account_deleted ( 4530225 ) on Friday September 04, 2009 @04:09AM (#29308617)
    Comment removed based on user account deletion
  • by Rufus211 ( 221883 ) <rufus-slashdotNO@SPAMhackish.org> on Friday September 04, 2009 @05:01AM (#29308833) Homepage

    I expect that in this case it's those who were shareholders in 2006 suing the company, who are likely no longer shareholders. In that case it's fairly reasonable. Say someone bought stock in 2005 and then sold it in 2006 when shit hit the fan for a substantial loss. That person can now recoup some of the their losses.

    Also Take Two had some sort of crazy umbrella insurance (how do you get "our directors are incompetent" insurance?) so the insurance company is ponying up $15M of the $20M.

    I wonder if I could manage to pull this off at a personal level. Get an umbrella insurance policy. Crash my car into a tree. Sue myself(defendant) for the pain and suffering caused due to the negligence of myself(plaintiff). If I(plaintiff) win, I(defendant) get the insurance company to cover 3/4ths of the settlement cost.

  • by phantomfive ( 622387 ) on Friday September 04, 2009 @05:02AM (#29308835) Journal
    This wasn't a lawsuit by people upset by the nudity, it was a lawsuit by shareholders, upset that the company had lost money. They felt the whole thing had been poorly managed, and wanted changes. It turns out they were correct, not only was that particular 'scandal' poorly handled, the entire company was being poorly run, they didn't even know how much money they had.

    In addition, $15 million will be paid by their insurance company. Though I'll bet their insurance premiums are going up next year.
  • by Opportunist ( 166417 ) on Friday September 04, 2009 @06:14AM (#29309091)

    It might be religion based. When you read the Bible, people usually get punished for fucking but rewarded for killing.

  • Re:Only in the US (Score:3, Interesting)

    by pHus10n ( 1443071 ) on Friday September 04, 2009 @06:47AM (#29309217)
    Where in Europe are you? I'm currently stationed in England, and your "reversed" example is exactly something I saw one night on Sky TV around 10pm. It was a documentary about sex, including a scene where a couple are using multiple cameras... including one showing him pulsating inside her during orgasm.

    To top it off, there's a few movies I've seen on Sky One or Bravo that have the violent scenes removed from a movie --- even if it's integral to the plot.
  • by Ash Vince ( 602485 ) on Friday September 04, 2009 @07:26AM (#29309385) Journal

    In the latest version of Americas Army, the rectuiting tool produced by the United States you get to zip tie people after you have wounded them and let them bleed out on the floor.

  • by Golddess ( 1361003 ) on Friday September 04, 2009 @08:12AM (#29309587)
    Also, the amount of penis you can show and still keep an R rating is much much lower than the amount of breasts/vaginas you can show within an R rating.

    I forget where I heard this, I think it was in one of the Indie Sex [wikipedia.org] films.
  • by quantumplacet ( 1195335 ) on Friday September 04, 2009 @08:54AM (#29309907)

    actually, an R rating only gets you tits and ass. show a cock in any sort of sexual context and it's NC-17.

  • by Anonymous Coward on Friday September 04, 2009 @08:56AM (#29309935)

    Oh please. Trust me, the watercooler and dinner table talk revolves around health care and the financial system. No one has even heard of this Hot Coffee thing except here on Slashdot.

  • by jollyreaper ( 513215 ) on Friday September 04, 2009 @09:54AM (#29310463)

    You can show a man plunge a knife into a woman on television but god help you if you want to show him using a penis instead.

    Our society is a contradiction wrapped inside a hangup buried beneath a shitpile of hypocrisy. It's weird how we can have sex turned up to 11 to sell us shit on the tee-vee but actually showing it in a healthy manner is still verboten. I think it's the repression pushing down on society as a whole that has the prurient parts squeezing out the sides in such a disturbing manner. People get all horny and frustrated because pop culture is steeped in sex but trying to find a simple goddamn human connection in meatspace is an exercise in frustration. I suppose it's good for the economy. Angry and frustrated people usually go and buy something to make themselves feel better.

    Islamic societies are also known for their contradictions. It's still considered awesome for the man to get his wick dipped but any woman who does the same is a slut who should be put to death. Homosexuality is a crime worthy of death but the old ruling powers in the Middle East had their tradition of the catamite and there's a folk hero in Persian folklore I believe known for for always having his jug of wine and his boy close at hand.

  • Re:Fundamentalists (Score:3, Interesting)

    by westlake ( 615356 ) on Friday September 04, 2009 @11:23AM (#29311593)

    This is what you get in any fundamentalist country.

    That Rockstar was headed for a crack-up was perfectly clear to anyone outside the hard-core gaming community.

    Hot Coffee was no more an aberration than the later dust-ups over Bully and Manhunt 2.

    Hot Coffee is button mashing arcade sex play for adolescents. Not far removed from Custer's Revenge. [wikipedia.org] [1982]

    The fundamentalist could argue that* the geek hasn't the least idea of how to introduce mature sexual themes and content into PC and console gaming. That he can't think beyond rape and prostitution.

    *- apart from the singular success of The Sims

  • by trytoguess ( 875793 ) on Friday September 04, 2009 @05:08PM (#29317249)

    Um... no when was the last time you watched TV? Generally speaking showing sex is ok as long as it's missionary position, vaginal, between a man and woman, and shows little besides the mans chest, and perhaps a little side boob. I recommend watching the movie "This Film Is Not Yet Rated" if you have the time. It does only deal with sex in films, but most of it's points also work for television.

UNIX is hot. It's more than hot. It's steaming. It's quicksilver lightning with a laserbeam kicker. -- Michael Jay Tucker

Working...