Log in:
Register Now! It's FREE!
Members click here to Sign In!

News
RECENT ANNOUNCEMENTS
Post new topic

$246 million dollar lawsuit filed against makers of GTA3

RealPoor.com » RealPoor General Talk » General Badass
 Goto page 1, 2   Next
 
Author
 
 
Message
 
Posted: 10/22/03 - 13:33
Report abuse 
RealPoor Guru
Rennol
Joined: 11 Oct 2002
Posts: 3613
 
lol
http://www.cnn.com/2003/LAW/10/22/videogame.lawsuit.ap/index.html

Quote:

KNOXVILLE, Tennessee (AP) -- A $246 million lawsuit was filed against the designer, marketer and a retailer of the video game series "Grand Theft Auto" by the families of two people shot by teenagers apparently inspired by the game.

The suit claims marketer Sony Computer Entertainment America Inc., designers Take-Two Interactive Software and Rockstar Games, and Wal-Mart, are liable for $46 million in compensatory damages and $200 million in punitive damages.

Aaron Hamel, 45, a registered nurse, was killed and Kimberly Bede, 19, of Moneta, Virginia, was seriously wounded when their cars were hit June 25 by .22-caliber bullets as they passed through the Great Smoky Mountains.

Stepbrothers William Buckner, 16, and Joshua Buckner, 14, of Newport, were sentenced in August to an indefinite term in state custody after pleading guilty in juvenile court to reckless homicide, endangerment and assault.

The boys told investigators they got the rifles from a locked room in their home and decided to randomly shoot at tractor-trailer rigs, just like in the video game "Grand Theft Auto III."

In a suit filed Monday in Cocke County Circuit Court on behalf of the victims, Miami lawyer Jack Thompson and local lawyer Richard Talley alleged the game "inspires and trains players to shoot at vehicles and persons."

"These kids simply decided to take the thrill of that game out to Interstate 40 and started pointing at cars," Thompson said in a telephone interview Tuesday.

Thompson, who said he sent letters to Sony and Wal-Mart to drop the game before the shootings, said, "It's not like this is coming out of the blue, they chose to ignore this danger."

San Mateo, California-based Sony and Bentonville, Arkansas-based Wal-Mart did not return calls for comment Tuesday. The lawsuit alleges the retail giant sold the game to the Buckners about a year before the shootings.

Douglas Lowenstein, president of the industry Entertainment Software Association, called the shootings "an unspeakable tragedy" but said blaming a game played by millions for the boys' actions was "misguided and counterproductive."

"There is no credible evidence that violent games lead to violent behavior," he said. "While video games may provide a simple excuse for the teenagers involved in this incident, responsibility for violent acts belongs to those who commit them."

Thompson has made similar claims in the past and lost, notably a $33 million lawsuit against video game makers stemming from the 1997 school shooting near Paducah, Kentucky, by a 14-year-old boy.

The 6th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals ruled in the case last year that it was "simply to far a leap from shooting characters on a video screen to shooting people in a classroom."



Reply with quote
Posted: 10/22/03 - 13:35
Report abuse 
Clevinger

 
Another example of why the world has too many lawyers.


Reply with quote
Posted: 10/22/03 - 13:37
Report abuse 
RealPoor Jedi
Occulis
Joined: 11 Oct 2002
Posts: 13299
 
Quote:
If a ruler abides by its principles,
then her people will willingly follow.
Heaven would then reign on earth,
like sweet rain falling on paradise.
People would have no need for laws,
because the law would be written on their hearts.


Reply with quote
Posted: 10/22/03 - 13:37
Report abuse 
Toomuchtimeonhands
Tav
Joined: 11 Oct 2002
Posts: 845
 
lame

If they start letting these lawyers win these cases, society is totally in trouble.

They'll be outlawing all kinds of creative works from books to movies and everything in between.


Reply with quote
Posted: 10/22/03 - 13:39
Report abuse 
RealPoor Guru
Syke
Joined: 12 Oct 2002
Posts: 2658
 
I like how they say blaming a video game is counterproductive, when the whole video game itself is based on being counterproductive. Razz



EDIT: And not only is it based on being counterproductive, the fact that it's a VIDEO GAME means it's counterproductive altogether, even without the counterproductive story line and game schematics.

Last edited by Syke on 10/22/03 - 13:40; edited 1 time in total


Reply with quote
Posted: 10/22/03 - 13:40
Report abuse 
RealPoor Master of Posts
Frax
Joined: 11 Oct 2002
Posts: 8190
 
This is an example of parents not controlling what their children are exposed to at that age, I'm pretty certain that GTA3 is marked "Mature", meaning it's for adults and not children. WTG MOM AND DAD!


Reply with quote
Posted: 10/22/03 - 13:51
Report abuse 
RealPoor Guru
Janoth
Joined: 17 Nov 2002
Posts: 2766
 
I am gonna start going around randomly beating the shit out of old people, then blame it on Pedro.... And sue major league baseball for causing my psychological problems! I WAS NEVER WARNED I WAS GOING 2 BE EXPOSED TO PEDRO LAYING OUT SOME FAT OLD GUY SO I DID NOT NO HOW 2 REACT UR HONER


Reply with quote
Posted: 10/22/03 - 13:53
Report abuse 
Clevinger

 
Janothhhh wrote:
I am gonna start going around randomly beating the shit out of old people, then blame it on Pedro.... And sue major league baseball for causing my psychological problems! I WAS NEVER WARNED I WAS GOING 2 BE EXPOSED TO PEDRO LAYING OUT SOME FAT OLD GUY SO I DID NOT NO HOW 2 REACT UR HONER


hahha

zimm never saw it coming


Reply with quote
Posted: 10/22/03 - 13:55
Report abuse 
Clevinger

 
almost as bad as this p***y

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,100815,00.html


Reply with quote
Posted: 10/22/03 - 13:57
Report abuse 
RealPoor Jedi
Paco
Joined: 13 Oct 2002
Posts: 12380
 
Frax wrote:
This is an example of parents not controlling what their children are exposed to at that age, I'm pretty certain that GTA3 is marked "Mature", meaning it's for adults and not children. WTG MOM AND DAD!


/agree


Reply with quote
Posted: 10/22/03 - 14:25
Report abuse 
RealPoor Guru
Brash
Joined: 20 Oct 2002
Posts: 3713
 
i swear noone can take responsabilty for thier own actions anymore


Reply with quote
Posted: 10/22/03 - 14:29
Report abuse 
RealPoor Master of Posts
NickPSH
Joined: 11 Oct 2002
Posts: 5448
 
10/1 says those kids never got punished with spankings


Reply with quote
Posted: 10/22/03 - 14:33
Report abuse 
RealPoor Sensei
Haphasto
Joined: 10 Nov 2002
Posts: 1787
 
HEY!!! I pull off GTA stunts all the time Confused


Reply with quote
Posted: 10/22/03 - 14:36
Report abuse 
RealPoor Sensei
Jinu
Joined: 11 Oct 2002
Posts: 1882
 
My boss use to work at Rock Star and he is so proud of his little GTA baby. Too bad he doesn't still work there or I'd be laughing at his a*s all day Sad


Reply with quote
Posted: 10/22/03 - 14:37
Report abuse 
RealPoor Master of Posts
Nictathan
Joined: 11 Oct 2002
Posts: 5155
 
What a f*****g joke...

Here is the process that has lead video games to the point they are at now...

1) mom sees demons on Doom, doesn't like it, flips out on child, takes game away from child. Child then performs some violent act and the mother is all like I think it was Doom that did it! He played that!

2) Another incident where the perp of the crime played Doom and people think they are seeing a connection.

3) Mortal Kombat is considered too violent and it among other games go to the senate hearings (maybe it was just congressional)

4) little Jimmy kills someone and wants to try and place the blame somewhere else so he says "The video game made me do it"

And we're where we are. The media has put into these kids' head that they can blame it on something else and not only will they not be in nearly as much trouble as they would have been had they taken responsibility, but they get all sorts of attention...

If GTA3 were inspired by every-minute acts of LA, could TakeTwo/Sony/Walmart now just sue LA for giving them inspiration for a video game?


Reply with quote
Posted: 10/22/03 - 15:40
Report abuse 
Banzai

 
I want to sue the makers of "Office Space" for makeing a job sitting on my a*s all day in IT look reomtely entertaineing.


Reply with quote
Posted: 10/22/03 - 17:26
Report abuse 
Toomuchtimeonhands
Eduin
Joined: 14 Oct 2002
Posts: 879
 
See, here is the thing I don't understand.

America has a first ammendment right to freedom of speech. that entails being able to diseminate *any* information. At all. So why the f**k hasn't the first ammendment right been used to create precedent in cases such as these (and if it has, why haven't counter claims led to lawyer bankruptcy).

It just doesn't add up.

Regards,
Eduin


Reply with quote
Posted: 10/22/03 - 17:30
Report abuse 
RealPoor Master of Posts
Nictathan
Joined: 11 Oct 2002
Posts: 5155
 
Because Ed... at the same time these people have a right to fight against what they feel is wrong. That's why the judge is to see it. I agree with you in every way, I'm just saying that it is also they're right to take silly legal battles to court and waste taxpayer money...

McDonalds made me fat whhhhhhhaaaaaaaaaaaa
Cigarettes gave me lung cancer whaaaaaaaaaaaaa
etc...

I mean really these are things that should be known to people but their stupidity causes issues like these.


Reply with quote
Posted: 10/22/03 - 17:35
Report abuse 
RealPoor Master of Posts
WheresNWS
Joined: 19 Nov 2002
Posts: 6423
 
Why would a nurse or a 19 year old girl be worth $123 million?


Reply with quote
Posted: 10/22/03 - 17:40
Report abuse 
Toomuchtimeonhands
Eduin
Joined: 14 Oct 2002
Posts: 879
 
Nictathan wrote:
Because Ed... at the same time these people have a right to fight against what they feel is wrong. That's why the judge is to see it. I agree with you in every way, I'm just saying that it is also they're right to take silly legal battles to court and waste taxpayer money...


No, I still don't get it. Launching unconstitutional lawsuits is *actionable*, against the lawyer and the Pursuer (you call it something else - funny latin based word that means opposite of the Defender). A single win at second level (state circuit court, AFAIK) would mean any further actions would be, in themselves, automatically invalid and actionable. Yet the defendants in all these cases have not called on constitutional law. That's what I don't understand.

Regards,
Eduin


Reply with quote

Post new topic
 
MY NAVIGATOR
 
 
Newsletter
 

Subscribe to FREE monthly RealPoor.com newsletter.

RealPoor.com » RealPoor General Talk » General Badass
 Goto page 1, 2  Next
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum