PDA

View Full Version : NEXT GEN: Grand Theft Auto Civil Case Moves Forward


RobertoOrtiz
03-30-2006, 10:02 PM
Quote:
"The Alabama Supreme Court has denied an appeal by game makers and retailers to throw out a $600 million lawsuit brought forward by the families of victims of Devin Moore's GTA-like killing spree."

>>LINK<< (http://www.next-gen.biz/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=2620&Itemid=2)

-R

dARCKLOWN
03-31-2006, 05:04 AM
I love how we live in a society where no one is responsible for their own actions anymore.
Im just waiting for the next "thing" for people to blame violence on so can leave my beloved video games alone.

Chris Rock said it best:

"What ever happened to good old craaaaazy?!"

LoTekK
03-31-2006, 05:35 AM
Video games are the new insanity plea. :rolleyes:

PhantomDesign
03-31-2006, 05:36 AM
Six-Hundred-Million!!!

Edit: I noticed Walmart & Game-Stop are on the lsit of people being sued. Regardless of the fact that it makes no sense to sue the store, did he buy the game from both places or something?

depleteD
03-31-2006, 05:59 AM
omg bloody neo cons, where were his parents? why weren't they talking to their kid to see how his life is going. SUch a joke, they can't take responsibility for their shitty parenting so they blame a video game. What a farce. Man if they come away with profit I will be so mad.

Cronholio
03-31-2006, 07:18 AM
omg bloody neo cons, where were his parents? why weren't they talking to their kid to see how his life is going. SUch a joke, they can't take responsibility for their shitty parenting so they blame a video game. What a farce. Man if they come away with profit I will be so mad.

I'm sure people like Joseph Lieberman and Hilary Clinton, who have been the most vocal championing the crusade against violent games by a wide margin, would strongly object to being labeled neo cons. Additionally, you should note that it was the shooter himself (who is an adult) in this case who placed the blame on GTA, not his parents, and a conservative court threw his defense out, made him responsible for his own actions and sentenced him to death.

Not trying to make this political, not a supporter of capitol punishment, just trying to help you have an informed opinion.

sumpm1
03-31-2006, 08:46 AM
omg bloody neo cons, where were his parents? why weren't they talking to their kid to see how his life is going. SUch a joke, they can't take responsibility for their shitty parenting so they blame a video game. What a farce. Man if they come away with profit I will be so mad.

I agree with you about parents needing to take responibility, but the parents of the killer are found NOWHERE in this lawsuit. It is the families of the victims that are suing. I think they have a fair chance of earning some money in this case, but they CANNOT and WILL NOT win the case. Since this is the Supreme Court we are dealing with, they won't set a president as stupid as suing stores and entertainment companies for end users going berzerk. If they did, soon after, every overweight American could RIGHTFULLY sue fast food companies, groceries, food manufacturers, and POSSIBLY GOD HIMSELF (for creating food in seven days that is).

Now, if the assassin had used the actual GTA CD as a weapon to slit the throats of the victims, they would have a greater possibility of winning, but no more of a chance than trying to sue a gun company for the deaths.

Als
03-31-2006, 03:29 PM
I disagree with the law suit.
It's clearly parents and the surrounding who would be to blame, and youth himself,
not the game makers.
BUT, the current wave of violent games is NOT helping either.
I'm sick and tired of watching stupid gore and horror on the television commercials.
Trigger happy games are reaching into reality and that is certainly bad.
Stupid commercial like the shooting piano for Black, or the other one which was rightly banned (I think they are all EA, are they not?)
And those of you who will now jump to defend violent games, tell me if that is ok, then why not make a for example "terrorist" game, which will teach you how to be a terorist, make a bomb etc. Would that be ok?
I do not think so...

Thanks


Als

ParamountCell
03-31-2006, 06:56 PM
I disagree with the law suit.
It's clearly parents and the surrounding who would be to blame, and youth himself,
not the game makers.
BUT, the current wave of violent games is NOT helping either.
I'm sick and tired of watching stupid gore and horror on the television commercials.
Trigger happy games are reaching into reality and that is certainly bad.
Stupid commercial like the shooting piano for Black, or the other one which was rightly banned (I think they are all EA, are they not?)
And those of you who will now jump to defend violent games, tell me if that is ok, then why not make a for example "terrorist" game, which will teach you how to be a terorist, make a bomb etc. Would that be ok?
I do not think so...

Thanks


Als


I agree with you, I doubt that there will be many who will agree with us though. At times in games it is possible for violence not to come out being just a cheesy excuse for acts of violence, but these days it seems that allot of companies just want to jump on the bandwagon and be as offensive as possible.

sumpm1
03-31-2006, 07:01 PM
Hey, there has been controversial material around forever, not video games, but porn, comics, poetry. This is not a new issue, and over time, the subject the most violence has resulted in is religion. We all have a right to envision anything we like, we just can't hurt anyone doing it. So you can go home and make drawings of dead people, naked people, etc... But what happens if you and lawmakers decide that these games are unlawful? Those lawmakers will have a new agenda, to stop porn, or stop profanity, and in the end, limit and control your life maore than you want them to. That is the problem, we must hold lawmakers at bay, and never give in, so they can't push any further into our freedoms that we enjoy and take for granted in the US.

Here's an example, though not related to controversial material, it is related to lawmakers and laws. Say that lawmakers are fighting to increase taxes for one reason or another. They will present a million reasons why we need to raise taxes, even if those reasons are completely fictional, just to rerach their end result, GET MORE MONEY. Well, if and when we budge and they get their tax raise, what do you think THOSE SAME LAW FIRMS will do next? Retire? No, they will be fighting a new fight, because the old fight is over and they win again and again, if we let them. Fight, petition, stop them. Once taxes raise, they are NEVER lowered, and I mean never. Likewise, once freedoms are impeded and taken away, they are NEVER given back. Think about that, and be a fighter for now on.

ParamountCell
03-31-2006, 07:08 PM
sumpm1


some valid points there, but then we also have to look at how big businesses are trying to control things, allot of the time it seems they only want to make money by being controversial. So we could choose to fight on the side of the lawmakers, or the big businesses, who may both have a devious agenda. I for one choose to fight for myself and my family, this means that when i do have children, i will censor them from such things until they have reached a proper age.

depleteD
03-31-2006, 09:03 PM
Ah yea sumpm1, i immediatley assumed it was the neo cons. I'm not really informed on this issue. Point taken.

Wintermute
03-31-2006, 09:18 PM
I believe there is already a precedent for a case like this.

Gun manufacturers are not liable for what idiots or criminals do with their products.
Fast food outlets are not liable for making individuals fat.

How then can a game publisher be held liable for the actions of an individual, just because he said he was inspired by their product?

It's called personal responsibility.

The families of the victims should be going after the criminal in a "wrongful death" suit. Just as in the cases of Robert Blake and OJ Simpson. But seeing as how this guy probably has no assets at all, their lawyers are going for the money from the retailer/publisher/developer group.

JeroenDStout
03-31-2006, 09:42 PM
Video games influence you, yes, there's a lot of games that deal with the morals one isn't proud of to exhibit in public but finds exciting to go through in a game. The idea that someone is influenced by a game so much he starts shooting is ludicrous, however. I'm not shouting 'mad' or 'personal responsibility', but I'm shouting that we're blaming the wrong people. If a video game could make all the difference, then what exactly stops schools and most of all, parents, from making all the right difference?
Humans aren't saints by nature and need a lot of morals added.. though mostly people seem to assume that, surely, we humans are so swell that we're all very nice people indeed and could only be bad because of influence - sometimes it seems people seem to forget we can only be good because of influence as well. What's good and what's bad is mandatory, but people are told what to do and their 'basic instinct' is just another pawn in the whole play of it.

So if people moan that people are influenced wrong, ask them what exactly it is that they do to influence people right. And banning 'all the baddies' is not good influence, it's the absense of either.

Martin_G_3D
04-01-2006, 04:33 AM
Video games, movies, you name it, are not to blame for any violence. People uncapable of seeing the difference between entertainment and reality would do harm to their environment or theirself either way as they are simply put not right in the head.

And if you as a parent have a kid who isnt sane enough to make that distinction, and you can know that surreal things can influence what your kid does in reality, then you can know that you have to take special measures, meaning no extreme/odd movies or games and keeping him/her in check by telling them clearly what not to do.

A normal person you don't have to tell that as much, they learn by theirself whats real, whats right, whats wrong and whats just silly entertainment.

He's 18 years old.. at that age you can't commit homicide and blame it on anything but yourself, and the fact you're psychotic.

sumpm1
04-01-2006, 09:48 AM
sumpm1


some valid points there, but then we also have to look at how big businesses are trying to control things, allot of the time it seems they only want to make money by being controversial. So we could choose to fight on the side of the lawmakers, or the big businesses, who may both have a devious agenda. I for one choose to fight for myself and my family, this means that when i do have children, i will censor them from such things until they have reached a proper age.

I also agree with you that big business can also maqnipulate just as lawmakers, and are also closely tied to the government, money has power.

I'll tell you what though, this is better than faciasm. Imagine this; millions of people being controlled by the government; citizens have little freedom over content viewed as entertainment; 25 million Russian soldiers die fighting them and their strictly regulated killing machine.

Columbine, these short of shootings; hit close to your heart and emotions; they force you to feel that they are so close to your family; BUT THEY'RE NOT. Do YOU let your kid play freaking GTA ALL DAY? If you do, don't be surprised if he's a babbling idiot 5 years later! Supervise and care for children to prevent such crazy occurrences, but more for their sake to be productive citizens and hard workers that are happy with life; I am a teacher, and that is what our job is; make productive citizens...

I'll take a couple of freak occurrences over strictly dictated faciast nations that kill millions; we and our children have it way better than you may think. Let us ALL carry out our sick fantasies at home on our PS2, rather than in banks, and in REAL life. And please, don't stand behind your damn KIDS in an argument over entertainment content. Yes, we all understand TRUE threats such as drugs, alcoholism, teenage pregnancy, and physical harm. We all love ours to kids, and we want to protect them, but if you push your weak spot, that is, your children that are close to your heart, on lawmakers, they will use it against you and everyone as a plea to people's emotions, and we all suffer. What people watch, what people say, what people read, write, or publish, have zilch to do with your kids' safety.

Just care for, befriend, and stay close to your kids to protect them.

rakmaya
04-01-2006, 04:39 PM
How many thread we will see before the end of this year on this ? Who cares, life moves on. In time cry babies and hopeless parents will find another tool to blame. I know it is the victims, but doesn't matter. There are a million other things that can kills us in our every day life, crying about it doesn't help a bit. In the end, it is all the same.

What I am thinking is what is the next big thing after video games ? Once the motion picture became big, sex and violence in movies was a big deal, but then they put a sticker on it and called "for mature audience" and life moved on. We don't go sue producers of such movies now for our actions or the misfortunes that was brought upon us b/c of that. Soon the games will be like that too.

So what is the next big thing after video games ?

Apewall
04-01-2006, 05:15 PM
Parents are responsible for their children, and adults are responsible for themselves.

Video games, music, television and any other form of entertainment have no sway on reality if you are a competent human being, children should be monitored by their parents for violent games.

Wrong to accuse a game company for the lack of parental guidance or idiocy of an adult.

CupOWonton
04-01-2006, 10:08 PM
... I was realy hoping this was another April Fools joke. This makes me a Saaaaad Panda.

CupOWonton
04-01-2006, 10:09 PM
On another note, this may have been passed simply because the judge knew it would be lost by the plantifs, and thusly setting a precident so that no one can even try this again.

Frank Lake
04-02-2006, 12:03 AM
How many thread we will see before the end of this year on this ? Who cares, life moves on. In time cry babies and hopeless parents will find another tool to blame. I know it is the victims, but doesn't matter. There are a million other things that can kills us in our every day life, crying about it doesn't help a bit. In the end, it is all the same.

What I am thinking is what is the next big thing after video games ? Once the motion picture became big, sex and violence in movies was a big deal, but then they put a sticker on it and called "for mature audience" and life moved on. We don't go sue producers of such movies now for our actions or the misfortunes that was brought upon us b/c of that. Soon the games will be like that too.

So what is the next big thing after video games ?
Ummm.... you may want to invest some time in looking into just how long the ANTI-Video Games mob has been around. People raised hell about games like Frogger & Defender!! So don't think that this is a 'trend' by any means. It's only become trendy for the politico's to use it to gain votes.

Als
04-03-2006, 12:28 PM
I believe there is already a precedent for a case like this.
Gun manufacturers are not liable for what idiots or criminals do with their products.


Clearly they should be.
Like medicine it should be given only by subscription and on the aproval of doctor.
But they are way too powerfull for this to change and this debate would go forever.
But let me just say that tobacco companies were not responsible either, but not you have on every box of cigaretes that smoking causes cancer, and they lost couple of cases.



Fast food outlets are not liable for making individuals fat.


Well they actually are.
They are making portions bigger and bigger, with lots of fat and solt which is bad for you.
It is not only what you eat, but how it is prepared and what they put in it.
Typical scheme is that you can choose small, medium and big, and big is just sligtly more expensive then medium, so you always go for that one.
But they started changing since the pressure from the public is growing.


Al

Spritemare
04-03-2006, 02:01 PM
the community should have sued the kid's parents for $600 million.

CGTalk Moderation
04-03-2006, 02:01 PM
This thread has been automatically closed as it remained inactive for 12 months. If you wish to continue the discussion, please create a new thread in the appropriate forum.