Rockstar & Take Two Sued

Gamemaker Sued Over Hidden Sex in GTA (thanks Mike Martinez) reports a New York woman has filed suit against Take-Two Interactive over the adult content that turns out to be hidden within the game that she bought for her 14-year-old grandson (in spite of the game's 17+ rating). Here's the latest on better living though litigation:
Florence Cohen, 85, of New York, said in the lawsuit filed in U.S. District Court in Manhattan that the game's manufacturer, Rockstar Games, and its parent company, New York-based Take Two Interactive Software Inc., engaged in false, misleading and deceptive practices.

She sought unspecified damages on behalf of herself and all consumers nationwide, saying the company should give up its profits from the game for what amounted to false advertising, consumer deception and unfair business practices.
View : : :
59.
 
Re: No subject
Jul 28, 2005, 05:11
59.
Re: No subject Jul 28, 2005, 05:11
Jul 28, 2005, 05:11
 
Like some have said that there is a case about the full content of the game, or what it is capable of not being advertised or stated right. But then you say to access this content you have to do it yourself full well knowing what's going to happen long before, so you do it at you're own risk.

Though, for parents, if they bought the game already off what was on the box and felt their kid was mature enough but then learn their kid could possibly access adult content through a hack that they can't always be around to stop, there you have the problem. At that point, I think the buyer should only be allowed to return the game and get their money back.

But if the kid already accessed the content, then I guess they could sue. Though, how would parents know the kid accessed it, it's not like someone could accidently hit a key and start it up in the living room with the parents around by mistake.

I'm trying to word this my best, haven't had much sleep the last couple days.

This comment was edited on Jul 28, 05:13.
Date
Subject
Author
1.
Jul 27, 2005Jul 27 2005
6.
Jul 27, 2005Jul 27 2005
44.
Jul 27, 2005Jul 27 2005
47.
Jul 28, 2005Jul 28 2005
18.
Jul 27, 2005Jul 27 2005
19.
Jul 27, 2005Jul 27 2005
26.
Jul 27, 2005Jul 27 2005
2.
Jul 27, 2005Jul 27 2005
3.
Jul 27, 2005Jul 27 2005
4.
Jul 27, 2005Jul 27 2005
5.
Jul 27, 2005Jul 27 2005
10.
Jul 27, 2005Jul 27 2005
62.
Jul 28, 2005Jul 28 2005
69.
Jul 28, 2005Jul 28 2005
77.
Jul 28, 2005Jul 28 2005
   Re: ESRB
7.
Jul 27, 2005Jul 27 2005
8.
Jul 27, 2005Jul 27 2005
9.
Jul 27, 2005Jul 27 2005
11.
Jul 27, 2005Jul 27 2005
12.
Jul 27, 2005Jul 27 2005
13.
Jul 27, 2005Jul 27 2005
14.
Jul 27, 2005Jul 27 2005
38.
Jul 27, 2005Jul 27 2005
15.
Jul 27, 2005Jul 27 2005
27.
Jul 27, 2005Jul 27 2005
63.
Jul 28, 2005Jul 28 2005
16.
Jul 27, 2005Jul 27 2005
17.
Jul 27, 2005Jul 27 2005
21.
Jul 27, 2005Jul 27 2005
20.
Jul 27, 2005Jul 27 2005
22.
Jul 27, 2005Jul 27 2005
24.
Jul 27, 2005Jul 27 2005
28.
Jul 27, 2005Jul 27 2005
23.
Jul 27, 2005Jul 27 2005
37.
Jul 27, 2005Jul 27 2005
41.
Jul 27, 2005Jul 27 2005
25.
Jul 27, 2005Jul 27 2005
29.
Jul 27, 2005Jul 27 2005
30.
Jul 27, 2005Jul 27 2005
31.
Jul 27, 2005Jul 27 2005
32.
Jul 27, 2005Jul 27 2005
33.
Jul 27, 2005Jul 27 2005
   Re: ...
36.
Jul 27, 2005Jul 27 2005
    Re: ...
39.
Jul 27, 2005Jul 27 2005
     No subject
42.
Jul 27, 2005Jul 27 2005
     Re: ...
64.
Jul 28, 2005Jul 28 2005
    Re: ...
35.
Jul 27, 2005Jul 27 2005
34.
Jul 27, 2005Jul 27 2005
40.
Jul 27, 2005Jul 27 2005
43.
Jul 27, 2005Jul 27 2005
46.
Jul 28, 2005Jul 28 2005
66.
Jul 28, 2005Jul 28 2005
67.
Jul 28, 2005Jul 28 2005
68.
Jul 28, 2005Jul 28 2005
70.
Jul 28, 2005Jul 28 2005
     Re: No subject
80.
Jul 28, 2005Jul 28 2005
      Re: No subject
83.
Jul 28, 2005Jul 28 2005
       Re: No subject
71.
Jul 28, 2005Jul 28 2005
     Re: No subject
74.
Jul 28, 2005Jul 28 2005
      Jalous
78.
Jul 28, 2005Jul 28 2005
      Re: No subject
81.
Jul 28, 2005Jul 28 2005
       Re: No subject
87.
Jul 28, 2005Jul 28 2005
        Re: No subject
45.
Jul 28, 2005Jul 28 2005
65.
Jul 28, 2005Jul 28 2005
48.
Jul 28, 2005Jul 28 2005
50.
Jul 28, 2005Jul 28 2005
51.
Jul 28, 2005Jul 28 2005
52.
Jul 28, 2005Jul 28 2005
53.
Jul 28, 2005Jul 28 2005
56.
Jul 28, 2005Jul 28 2005
57.
Jul 28, 2005Jul 28 2005
58.
Jul 28, 2005Jul 28 2005
 59.
Jul 28, 2005Jul 28 2005
     Re: No subject
49.
Jul 28, 2005Jul 28 2005
54.
Jul 28, 2005Jul 28 2005
55.
Jul 28, 2005Jul 28 2005
76.
Jul 28, 2005Jul 28 2005
86.
Jul 28, 2005Jul 28 2005
60.
Jul 28, 2005Jul 28 2005
61.
Jul 28, 2005Jul 28 2005
72.
Jul 28, 2005Jul 28 2005
73.
Jul 28, 2005Jul 28 2005
75.
Jul 28, 2005Jul 28 2005
84.
Jul 28, 2005Jul 28 2005
85.
Jul 28, 2005Jul 28 2005
79.
Jul 28, 2005Jul 28 2005
82.
Jul 28, 2005Jul 28 2005
88.
Jul 29, 2005Jul 29 2005
89.
Jul 29, 2005Jul 29 2005
91.
Jul 30, 2005Jul 30 2005
92.
Jul 30, 2005Jul 30 2005