Jacko!

[Dr. Walker]

Ah, Jack Thompson. If you're a gamer, then surely you have heard that name somewhere. Here, perhaps a picture will help as well:
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/2/2d/JackThompsonAttorney.jpg/200px-JackThompsonAttorney.jpg

Anyways, if you want to catch up on the history of Jacko, you can all check it here: (skimming is enough)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jack_Thompson_%28attorney%29

Now, as I was gonna continue, Jack has recently filed a lawsuit and complaint directed towards Take-Two once again, for using his likeness. Here's the full scoop:
Thats right, Jack is back. Yesterday attorney Jack Thompson filed a complaint against Take Two at a federal court in Florida. Thompson states that he believes that Rockstar Games has used his likeness in GTA4, and says that he isn't to happy with the role he has been given within the game.
In the September issue of Game Informer an article about GTA4 was released which contained a summary of a mission that Niko completed while Game Informer was shown the latest demo. In the mission, Niko was sent to kill off a lawyer. Once Niko points a gun at the soon-to-be-dead lawyer, the lawyer exclaims "Guns don’t kill people. Video games do." Apparently Thompson believes that this line made references to him, and he believes that the lawyer killed within the mission was Take Two's take on him.
As a result, Thompson sent a letter to Take Two Chairman Strauss Zelnick demanding that this mission be taken out of the game. Jack Thompson dramatically gave Zelnick till 5pm of last Friday to comply his demands. However, Take Two doesn't negotiate with terrorists and now Jack Thompson has taken the matter to court with hopes of blocking the release of GTA4.
Its still unclear as to what grounds Jack Thompson has filed his suit under, since satire has historically been protected by the First Amendment of the United States Constitution, but if any thing does come of it we'll be the first to let you know.
Source: http://gta-sanandreas.com/

Now, I don't know about you guys, but I'm finding this extremely similar to an earlier "cease and desist" notice he sent out to midway. Now, if you guys are like me, you're gonna find this absolutely killer! XD
"In October 2006, Thompson sent a letter to Midway Games, demanding they cease and desist selling the latest game in the Mortal Kombat series, Mortal Kombat: Armageddon, claiming that the game was illegally profiting on his likeness, because gamers could use the Kreate a Fighter option to make a character who looked like Jack Thompson. Midway has not ceased distribution of the game."

So, the debatable question here is, does Jacko have any grounds to file his complains and lawsuits. Does he in fact, have any reasons to, and if any of you were in his shoes, would you be doing the same?

[malfuncti0n]

Firstly, the man is by now, a well renowned idiot. His ignorance, stupidity, and complete disregarding of the constitution has proven itself time and time again.

Today he is hardly taken serious by anyone, regardless. What more can i say about a man who hates the first amendment and believes in ignorant pissant stereotypes.

We have our modern day McCarthy.

[Dr. Walker]

Firstly, the man is by now, a well renowned idiot. His ignorance, stupidity, and complete disregarding of the constitution has proven itself time and time again.

Today he is hardly taken serious by anyone, regardless. What more can i say about a man who hates the first amendment and believes in ignorant pissant stereotypes.

We have our modern day McCarthy.

Well, except people actually did what McCarthy wanted. Besides, this dude is more of a douchebag. I'll give you an example:

A while ago, about a year, a little foundation and group was formed called "Flowers for Jack" and "Pixelantes." Their soul purpose was, without bias, or anything of the sort, was to intelligently put up a discussion with Jack concerning his stereo typing, and, as the name implies sent flowers to him as something of a peace offering. This was his reply to the flowers:
"They can send me all the flowers they want. I'll send them along to the families of the slain policemen."

It gets better. One of the members of both groups, Alyson Burch, sent an email to Jacko passionately trying to convey the group's thoughts and feelings to him. This is the email she sent to Mr. Thompson:
First off, my name is Alyson Burch and I'm the cofounder of
'Flowers for Jack'. I would also like to state that my partner
(George) and I have no affiliation what-so-ever with Take Two or
Joystiq. George and I take full responsibility. Also, I emailed this
to you a few days ago and never received a response. My partner,
George, gave me your email so I could do my half of the explaining.

Now that all the formal stuff is taken care of, let me explain how
and why this is, because, you deserve to know! Our original intent was
to apologize for all the heinous acts or fellow gamers have done and
to show you that gamers can be anybody and everybody. Hate mail only
causes more hate! So instead of taking the easy way and sending some
boring letter, we decided to put a little 'zest' in our creation. We
added beautiful flowers of all colors to prove an act of non-violence,
and just because your views are unpopular, doesn't mean we should be
belligerent and cruel. I, personally, would like to talk to you some
time just to hear how your ideas work (just a fascination of mine as a
curious mind) and converse on my views. But, our point is not to make
you mad, but to get your attention. I mean this in all sincerity. I
admire how you stick to your beliefs, however, being stubborn and
sometimes arrogant is a serious downfall in winning people over. Yes,
I agree that minors shouldn't have access to rated R movies, M rated
games and graphic novels, but to damn the whole industry? Thats going
a bit to the extreme, no? Understand where we are coming from. I might
not be very old, but I know my fair share of strife (in the form of
rods holding my left leg together, thank the Army^^) and I've seen a
lot, too. I'm going to keep this brief so I don't take too much more
of your time. Please, don't just disregard us!

This, was Mr. John B. "Jack" Thompson's curt reply:
not interested. email me again and you'll regret it

So, here we come to a question: Is the guy...
A- A ****ing idiot
B- A douchebag

Debateh!

[malfuncti0n]

Thompson can be compared to McCarthy in many aspects actually, which is why i brought it up. Both used a huge scapegoat, communism and video games, both attracted alot of attention towards themselves, and both had a large downfall n the public eye. It is not that McCarthy was listened to, it was that if anyone went against him he called them a commie.

Regardless, i may find the man an arrogant, ignorant, pissant. But that is just what he sincerely believes, Obviously he can still see the evidence against his theory's and he chooses to ignore them or simply doesn't believe them.

In actuality i would merely call him a misguided, ignorant man. His response to the letter wasn't anything out of the ordinary or simply spiteful, but with his reputation he must certainly be a cynic by now, and obviously a distrustful individual.

[Dr. Walker]

Thompson can be compared to McCarthy in many aspects actually, which is why i brought it up. Both used a huge scapegoat, communism and video games, both attracted alot of attention towards themselves, and both had a large downfall n the public eye. It is not that McCarthy was listened to, it was that if anyone went against him he called them a commie.

Regardless, i may find the man an arrogant, ignorant, pissant. But that is just what he sincerely believes, Obviously he can still see the evidence against his theory's and he chooses to ignore them or simply doesn't believe them.

In actuality i would merely call him a misguided, ignorant man. His response to the letter wasn't anything out of the ordinary or simply spiteful, but with his reputation he must certainly be a cynic by now, and obviously a distrustful individual.

You want misguided? lol Here's all the misguidedness you could ask for:
http://www.g4tv.com/attackoftheshow/blog/post/629272/Jack_Thompson_vs_Adam_Sessler.html

Obviously, Sessler also ain't the most popular guy in the gaming community to a few select individuals (due to his sense of humor, and harsh reviews), and if a guy like Sessler manages to make a complete fool of Thompson on live television, you might wanna reconsider your comment regarding Thompson being "misguided."

[malfuncti0n]

First of all you have no idea what is going on his head, as far as you know he firmly believes the root of the problem is video games, he may not, but at the same time he may. We have no way of knowing, because like i said, we can't go into his head can we?

If he firmly believes in what he fights for, wrong as it may be, that is misguided, it cannot be debated. And a little video like that could not possibly debunk it.

[anubis24354]

First of all you have no idea what is going on his head, as far as you know he firmly believes the root of the problem is video games, he may not, but at the same time he may. We have no way of knowing, because like i said, we can't go into his head can we?

If he firmly believes in what he fights for, wrong as it may be, that is misguided, it cannot be debated. And a little video like that could not possibly debunk it.


The only real problem, though, is that even if he is misguided, being unwilling to debate the issue with a legitimate opponent, he completly invalidates his point. He is just weakening his case by refusing true debate. Were he to even give in slightly and allow himself to participate in open discussion of his beliefs, without the use of legal threats, he might be able to make his point seem more realistic. Besides, there is a difference between misguided and fanatical. Misguided would imply that were he to have someone tell him some valid points that go against what he currently believes, he might be able to change. The fact that he is completly unwilling to even consider alternatives to his personal beliefs turns him fanatical.

All that aside, I don't care weather he is talking about censuring video games, movies, music, or whatever. Censureship in one area would eventually leak into another so unless he is willing to consider alternatives to censureship, anyone with any real understanding of legalities will never give him the light of day for his views. The first amendment is pretty much the only one that is considered immutable. The rest can be touched on a bit here and there, but the first is our most sacred and considered inviolate. So there is no way to censure anything without eventually threatening other things. After all, precidents, even in seemingly unrelated areas, are what creates loopholes to follow through with other legal actions.

[Dr. Walker]

The only real problem, though, is that even if he is misguided, being unwilling to debate the issue with a legitimate opponent, he completly invalidates his point. He is just weakening his case by refusing true debate. Were he to even give in slightly and allow himself to participate in open discussion of his beliefs, without the use of legal threats, he might be able to make his point seem more realistic. Besides, there is a difference between misguided and fanatical. Misguided would imply that were he to have someone tell him some valid points that go against what he currently believes, he might be able to change. The fact that he is completly unwilling to even consider alternatives to his personal beliefs turns him fanatical.
All that aside, I don't care weather he is talking about censuring video games, movies, music, or whatever. Censureship in one area would eventually leak into another so unless he is willing to consider alternatives to censureship, anyone with any real understanding of legalities will never give him the light of day for his views. The first amendment is pretty much the only one that is considered immutable. The rest can be touched on a bit here and there, but the first is our most sacred and considered inviolate. So there is no way to censure anything without eventually threatening other things. After all, precidents, even in seemingly unrelated areas, are what creates loopholes to follow through with other legal actions.

Thats what Thompson is doing; looking for those loopholes. But with the way things are, he isn't bettering the society, or anything he claims; he's just trying to shove his own personal beliefs down everyone's throats, and wants his own values to become the indisputable law.

As I said before, being fanatical or misguided isn't the issue; the dude is determined that video games are the source of all of human kind's troubles.

[anubis24354]

Thats what Thompson is doing; looking for those loopholes. But with the way things are, he isn't bettering the society, or anything he claims; he's just trying to shove his own personal beliefs down everyone's throats, and wants his own values to become the indisputable law.
As I said before, being fanatical or misguided isn't the issue; the dude is determined that video games are the source of all of human kind's troubles.


How much would you be willing to bet that he doesn't really care about the violence in games? He probably realizes that if he created a loophole by getting something censured that the majority doesn't seem to care about, he could use that to move on to other things.

[malfuncti0n]

Besides, there is a difference between misguided and fanatical. Misguided would imply that were he to have someone tell him some valid points that go against what he currently believes, he might be able to change. The fact that he is completly unwilling to even consider alternatives to his personal beliefs turns him fanatical.
Misguided does in no way imply he can be "guided" unto another path. It is simply, prompted by wrong or inappropriate motives. It is his willingly ignoring the evidence against his ideals that makes him so.

He knows the valid points against him, does it seem to make im change, no. He is in part a fanatic to his cause, but that does not change the fact that he is also misguided.

Either way my previous posts show my thoughts on this man personally.

[Dr. Walker]

Hey! Some more interesting news that we can discuss showed up!

We can't help but cover the interesting happenings and goings-on with game-hating, Florida attorney Jack Thompson. He's like a slow motion car wreck or a dark, twisted sit-com.

In today's episode of the Jack Thompson Show, Jack includes apparently pornographic pictures with a court filing! Hilarity ensues!

Jack included the blue, all-man photos to indicate the nefarious connections of a legal adversary, Norm Kent, a criminal defense attorney from Fort Lauderdale. Thompson and Kent have a contentious legal history dating back nearly two decades. According to Thompson, Kent's website contains pictures of naked people.

Maybe including them with legal filings wasn't such a good move. U.S. District Court Judge Adalberto Jordan responded to the photos thusly:

The attached exhibit, which includes several graphic images of oral and genital sex between adult males, was filed electronically in the docket in this case, without prior permission from the court…

To the extent that the other attorney’s alleged conduct is in any way relevant… there was no need for Mr. Thompson to file these graphic images in the public record. A simple reference to the website and its alleged links would have sufficed…

And Lights! We'll be back next week with another episode, barring cancellation or disbarment.
Source: http://www.g4tv.com/thefeed/blog/post/679585/Jack_Thompson_In_Legal_Dispute.html#readmore

lol...Discuss? XD