Follow Slashdot blog updates by subscribing to our blog RSS feed

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
×
Games Government Entertainment Politics

Thompson and 2K Come To Blows Over Manhunt 2 99

Posted by Zonk from the alright-boys-no-biting-or-hits-below-the-belt dept.
GamePolitics is serving up email transcripts that show increasing tension between Jack Thompson and 2K Games. The two parties have been acting at least vaguely civilly towards each other since an April settlement. A taunting, factually incorrect email from Jack to 2K (and other parties) has set things off again. 2K's response is to-the-point: "We demand that you cease making these false statements about our online sales practices. Your dissemination of knowingly false statements for the purpose of adversely affecting Take-Two's business is actionable and we reserve all of our rights under the settlement agreement and state and federal law. Not only are your statements clearly false, but they were made in an email publicly disseminated to both the FTC and the press. Please be assured that I am happy to answer any questions you have concerning our practices in a private communications. It is for this very reason that our settlement agreement designates a legal contact for you at Take Two."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Thompson and 2K Come To Blows Over Manhunt 2 More

Thompson and 2K Come To Blows Over Manhunt 2

Comments Filter:

  • Title (Score:5, Funny)

    by Dr. Eggman ( 932300 ) on Friday August 31, 2007 @10:35AM (#20424455)
    I read the title and though Thompson had decided to go the Uwe Boll route and challenge his 2K critics to a boxing match. Watchout for 'is right, Rocky!

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by bhima ( 46039 )
      I am *still* amazed Uwe did so well.

      And, yes, his movies still suck.

      • Re: (Score:2, Informative)

        by Pitr ( 33016 )
        He had prior boxing experience, and trained for 4 months in order to kick ass on some geeks with no fighting experience (except for the 17 year old with a little experience, you go big man).

        Am I surprised he won, no, but it would have been fun to see one of the geeks take the same interest and have boned up on how to throw a punch. That having been said, it's not like I think he deserves any more respect than the zero respect I already have for him thanks to that stunt.

        Frankly I for one would have liked to
        • Didn't one critic with fighting experience try to apply to fight him and he refused? Seems like i read that somewhere. The guy met all the requirements, but after uwe talked to him he refused to do it. I think that's how it went anyway.

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by deniable ( 76198 )
      Yep, Jack Thompson causes more violence than video games.

  • I have an idea for a new video game (Score:5, Interesting)

    by jollyreaper ( 513215 ) on Friday August 31, 2007 @10:36AM (#20424475)
    You take the role of a young gamer whose favorite franchise has been canceled due to the lawsuits. No longer having virtual violence to occupy your time with, you decide to hunt down all the people responsible for taking your game away. Thompson is featured by name. Let's see the shitfit he pitches at that.

  • Come to blows? (Score:5, Funny)

    by KingSkippus ( 799657 ) * on Friday August 31, 2007 @10:36AM (#20424477) Homepage Journal

    Crap, you can't post a headline like that! I read the article excitedly expecting Jack Thompson and someone at Take Two to have literally come to blows! I was popping the popcorn to munch on while watching the video of it on YouTube!

  • I'm sure I'm not the first to suggest this (Score:4, Insightful)

    by bad_fx ( 493443 ) on Friday August 31, 2007 @10:39AM (#20424515) Journal
    But I can't help wondering if Jack is actually on some game studio's payroll. Surely he must realise that all his hot air and bullshit does very little except give the very games he rails against free puplicity while making himself look like a complete twat...
  • This is libel, I don't know anything about April's settlement (RTFA? Yeah, sure) but I smell a lawsuit lurking in Take-2's response.

  • Re: (Score:2, Funny)

    by account_deleted ( 4530225 )
    Comment removed based on user account deletion
    • Maybe it has reached critical mass, as it doesn't seem that JT is getting as much press these days as he used to. It must really hurt to crave the attention of the spotlight once the spectators have moved on. Maybe he's just a little lonely...

  • Better policy: just ignore the nutjob (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Alzheimers ( 467217 ) on Friday August 31, 2007 @11:04AM (#20424975)
    A better policy would just be to ignore the nutjob. Any time anyone says anything against him his name is back in the headlines, which is exactly what he doesn't deserve.

    • Re: (Score:1)

      by Omnedon ( 701049 )
      The problem with ignoring nutjobs is that they don't go away quietly if they win (and a lack of opposition allows them to win), they will - emboldened by victory - simply go after another target.

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by jandrese ( 485 )
      Sure, it's easy to tell Slashdot to ignore him, but our congressmen and major news outlets don't read Slashdot and don't know (well, the major news outlets should have figured it out by now, not that it will stop them from giving him all the airtime he wants) that Jack Thompson is a nut. If you don't fight him you'll find your parents and non-tech friends suddenly talking about how games make people go crazy and kill and congress will make legislation (that will pass with an overwhelming majority) that kil

    • A better policy would just be to ignore the nutjob. Any time anyone says anything against him his name is back in the headlines, which is exactly what he doesn't deserve.

      Yes, but 2K games doesn't mind being back in the headlines. If I didn't know better, I would think that Thompson was being paid to stir up such publicity.

  • J.T. wrong on firearms (Score:4, Informative)

    by dazedNconfuzed ( 154242 ) on Friday August 31, 2007 @11:07AM (#20425015)
    J.T. writes:

    Take-Two is welcome to use age verification software that is available for on-line alcohol, firearm and other purchases of adult material.

    Not sure about the other two, but NOBODY can "buy a firearm on-line".

    By law, and very heavily enforced throughout the industry, firearms must be physically transferred through Federal Firearms Licensees (FFL dealers), who require detailed forms be filled out and background checks run. While payment to original seller may occur on-line and arrangements for shipping occur, taking physical possession requires face-to-face meeting with a federally licensed dealer who will require federally recognized ID, run a NICS criminal background check (or confirm more detailed checks have occurred), and require legally binding statements of eligibility (a felony to lie on the so-called "yellow forms"). Shipping may only be to an FFL or current owner (not buyer).

    No, Jack, there is no "age verification software that is available for ... firearm ... purchases" - because you CANNOT legally purchase firearms on-line!
    • From what I've seen, there isn't age verification software for either of the others. I've never purchased alcohol online, but I do know that a lot of places will not ship directly to your door, but instead ship to a local liquor store for pickup. Age verification is performed there.

      As for adult material, I always thought that porn and whatnot just used the credit card for age verification. Do they do something else now?

      I've never heard of "age verification software," but does it come as any surprise when

      • Re: (Score:2, Informative)

        by EtoilePB ( 1087031 )
        From what I've seen, there isn't age verification software for either of the others. I've never purchased alcohol online, but I do know that a lot of places will not ship directly to your door, but instead ship to a local liquor store for pickup. Age verification is performed there.

        I purchase groceries from an online service from time to time (I live in a city, where cars aren't the norm, and the quality is good enough and prices competitive enough that it's worthwhile not walking thirty blocks with a mo

      • Re: (Score:2)

        by Phisbut ( 761268 )

        As for adult material, I always thought that porn and whatnot just used the credit card for age verification. Do they do something else now?

        Yes, they now bill the card. That's a new concept.

    • Re:J.T. wrong on firearms (Score:5, Informative)

      by DangerSteel ( 749051 ) on Friday August 31, 2007 @11:51AM (#20425579)
      Not sure about the other two, but NOBODY can "buy a firearm on-line".

      I cannot both respond and moderate your post a -1 wrong, but you can buy firearms online and nothing would restrict this as long as it is a private transaction as these are http://www.shootersexchange.com/ [shootersexchange.com] .

      • Re:J.T. wrong on firearms (Score:5, Funny)

        by IndustrialComplex ( 975015 ) on Friday August 31, 2007 @11:57AM (#20425659)
        Shooter s ex change? I think that qualifies in one of the top 50 most unfortunate domain names.

      • Re: (Score:2, Funny)

        by dorix ( 414150 )
        Unfortunate choice of URL.

      • Re:J.T. wrong on firearms (Score:5, Informative)

        by ErikTheRed ( 162431 ) on Friday August 31, 2007 @01:17PM (#20426659) Homepage

        I cannot both respond and moderate your post a -1 wrong, but you can buy firearms online and nothing would restrict this as long as it is a private transaction as these are http://www.shootersexchange.com/ [shootersexchange.com]


        Ummm... Wrong. And it only took a few seconds of looking at the shootersexchange website to figure it out. They are in an awkward position because they are not lawyers and cannot give specific legal advice, but they do point the buyers and sellers [shootersexchange.com] to places that specify the relevant federal and state laws.

        While you can enter into a contract to purchase a gun over the Internet, an FFL (Federal Firearms License) Holder [atfonline.gov] (someone who's licensed to sell guns) must make the physical transfer of the weapon to the purchaser. So you can't just have the gun shipped to you - it has to be shipped to an FFL, and then they physically verify who you are (and follow any other local laws regarding the transfer) and hand you the package. It's up to the buyer, seller, and FFL to make sure the applicable state and federal laws are followed, but that's still the case with a traditional "brick & mortar" purchase so there's no real difference.

        • They are in an awkward position because they are not lawyers and cannot give specific legal advice, but they do point the buyers and sellers to places that specify the relevant federal and state laws.

          Saying "can't be don't legally" and "can't be done at all" are too entirely different things. The statement that 'NOBODY can "buy a firearm on-line"' is demonstrably false.

          I like guns. I own guns. I'm not remotely anti-gun. It's just that this is like arguing that you can't gamble or buy drugs or pirate music online. Maybe the law says you shouldn't, but that's doesn't mean that you can't.

      • That still doesn't count, as it's not what J.T. is alluding to.

        The on-line firearm sales sites (gunbroker.com, gunsamerica.com, etc.) merely connect buyers with sellers, who still have to either (A) arrange for an intermediary FFL to handle the transfer, or (B) arrange a face-to-face meeting - neither of which counts as "buying firearms on-line" which typically conjures up images of "click on 'Mossberg 590 Master Key', quantity 1, click on 'cart', enter credit card number & address, have nifty new shotg

        • Re: (Score:2)

          by CFTM ( 513264 )
          Well I don't know about you guys but my local illegal arms dealer takes paypal, so mommy's credit card here I come!
      • ... http://www.shootersexchange.com/ [shootersexchange.com]...

        Shooter Sex Change?

        Uh, I'll take The Rapists, instead, Trebek.

      • Re: (Score:2)

        by dodongo ( 412749 )
        Did anyone else parse that URL as "shooter sex change dot com"?
      • From the website you linked:

        4. Be sure to find a FFL holding transfer agent prior to commiting to a purchase. Find and contact a FFL holding transfer agent through the FFL transfer agent links below.

        6. The dealer will ship the firearm or other item to your FFL holder or to you, as appropriate by law.

        Bolding mine.

        Like the parent post said, you can use the internet as a means of finding dealers and exchanging money, but its still illegal to ship a firearm directly to a buyer without involvement of a FFT ho

    • While you are correct in a practical and realistic sense, I know people who have *legally* purchased rifles and do not have FFLs, taking possesion was not face-to-face with a dealer - the seller literally mailed the rifle to an address and the postman collected a signature, there we no yellow forms that you would get at a real dealer. Of course, the seller was the US Army. They are allowed to sell surplus World War II rifles (M1 Garand) to tournament shooters and the paperwork was a little more detailed tha
      • You are probably thinking of the Civilian Marksmanship Program.

        They sell M1 Garands, M1 carbines, 1903s, and some surplus 22LR bolt guns directly to the public. Shipped straight to you via FedEx.

        Their requirements are that a person be a member of an affiliated shooting club and either have participated in a sanctioned match or be over the age of 60 (I think it is 60). They have a specific exemption that allows them to ship directly to non-FFL'd individuals and clubs as long as the customer meets the require

    • Not sure about the other two, but NOBODY can "buy a firearm on-line".

      My local newspaper regularly lists guns in the classified ads. I'm pretty certain that the buyers and sellers don't go through all those hoops, and I'm equally certain that I could mail one of those sellers a check and get a package from UPS a few days later without ever having met them.

      Maybe you can't legally buy a new gun online. Maybe you can't even legally buy a used gun without all the forms you mentioned. But you can darn sure buy a firearm through the classified ads in my paper, and that's jus

      • I bet Take Two's age verification system is much better than that used by the classifieds in your newspaper, though. So once again, you're left wondering WTF is JT talking about?

        • So once again, you're left wondering WTF is JT talking about?

          Speak for yourself. I wonder what he's talking about in the same way that I wonder why that guy asking me for a dollar is preaching about the saddle he found in a payphone and how toxins got in the space shuttle.

    • ot sure about the other two, but NOBODY can "buy a firearm on-line".

      By law, and very heavily enforced throughout the industry, firearms must be physically transferred through Federal Firearms Licensees (FFL dealers), who require detailed forms be filled out and background checks run. While payment to original seller may occur on-line and arrangements for shipping occur, taking physical possession requires face-to-face meeting with a federally licensed dealer who will require federally recognized ID, run a N

    • Re: (Score:1)

      by vimh42 ( 981236 )
      I think age verification software is pretty much a scam. How can you reasonably confirm age beyond using a credit card? Be connected to the DMV and confirm by drivers license or SSN? Now there is a brilliant idea.

  • A Girth of Gamers (Score:5, Funny)

    by Grech ( 106925 ) on Friday August 31, 2007 @11:36AM (#20425413) Homepage

    She looked up at him, and asked, "And what of Jack Thompson?"

    "He will continue to be my implacable enemy, lending his pen to every plot against me."

    She started to reply, but caught herself as a sudden realization struck. "And how will you repay him for this service?" she asked.

    He smiled. "With gold, and land, and boys. He is a simple man. All he desires are land, and gold, and boys."

    With apologies to George R. R. Martin

    .
    • Had I but the mod points I squandered these few days ago, I'd have modded you +1 Funny. Instead all I can do is talk about how I would.

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by CFTM ( 513264 )
      BAH! I say BAH! I had allowed myself to forget about this series until YOU had to bring it up. When is that old battle axe going to finish the next goshdangit book already!?!?
  • Stupid Headline! Got my hopes up for a cage match with Jack! Now I'll have no choice but to sulk like Achilles in his tent.

    Achilles....

    From the Illiad...

    READ A BOOK DAMNIT!

  • If two parties "come to blows," it means they actually laid hands on each other, got into an actual fistfight, etc. It does not mean "exchanged nasty letters" or "called each other bad names."

    Thanks for getting my hopes up, only to shoot them down. Don't bother me again until someone really does get hit over this.
  • I have never made but one prayer to God, a very short one: "O Lord make my enemies ridiculous." And God granted it.

    Voltaire

  • (*Uninstalls Bioshock DRM with tools like regdelnull, and NTFS-3g for the undeleteable files*)

    I never thought I'd say this, but "Go get 'em Jack!" I hope they go up in a big mushroom cloud together. ;^)

    --
    Toro

  • Jack Thompson, (Score:3, Interesting)

    by DragonTHC ( 208439 ) <Dragon AT gamerslastwill DOT com> on Saturday September 01, 2007 @12:00AM (#20431253) Homepage Journal
    It's a multi-billion dollar industry. You're fucking with their profits.
    You're fucking with my hobby.
    You need to be sued into the stone-age.
    You tried to sue the Florida bar for taking away your license.
    You have no honor, integrity or ethics.

    You can hide behind your moral compass all you like.
    It's leading you into the circus ring. Soon we can all laugh at the clown in the center ring.

  • Spellcheck (Score:2, Funny)

    by rav64 ( 1013843 )
    Interesting. He misspelled 'because' as 'becasue '.

Slashdot Top Deals

He has not acquired a fortune; the fortune has acquired him. -- Bion

Close