wow.. oxm really sucks

kenshindono

wow.. i know oxm isn't that great of a magazine, but their demo disc is usually at least amusing. However in their latest issue, resting there with its picks for best games of the year was a horrible ad. On page 69 they actually put an add from the lawyers suing rockstar for the hot coffee mod! It requests for people to join the class action lawsuit against rockstar.

I honestly couldn't belive this. Why would a gaming mag post an ad for such a frivilous, stuipd, lawsuit that hurts the gaming industry? Anyone know how I can contact rockstar and let them know of this? I dont think it would make any difference but if they dont know about it i think they should be informed. Maybe refuse this stuipd magazine a review copy of GTA IV

I checked rockstargames.com but coudnt' really find a forum and not sure what e-mail to send it to

Burtletoy

It is also in EGM this month.

Kagera

I don't see the problem, there's more than one gamer willing to take advantage of this and get some money. It interests gamers and they get ad money and it stirs controversy. It's smart.

kenshindono

you dont see a problem with supporting stupid frivilous lawsuits in a gaming magazine that should be suporting the industry, not hurting it?

whats next, political adds for jack thompson?


i sent an e-mail in the 'mouth off' link from rocckstargames.com.. not sure if thats the right venue

Kris_xK

Why are people are still bitching about that Hot Coffee hack? We all know it pales in comparison to the XXX Mass Effect and its full frontal sex orgies.

Think of the children!

FyreWulff

They deserve it for removing the original team from the credits for Manhunt 2.

Kagera

kenshindono wrote: »

you dont see a problem with supporting stupid frivilous lawsuits in a gaming magazine that should be suporting the industry, not hurting it?

whats next, political adds for jack thompson?

i sent an e-mail in the 'mouth off' link from rocckstargames.com.. not sure if thats the right venue

Why not? Jack defended Mass Effect.

EvilBadman

No, advertising in game magazines in general is stupid. Also, who reads print anymore?

Couscous

Kris_xK wrote: »

Why are people are still bitching about that Hot Coffee hack? We all know it pales in comparison to the XXX Mass Effect and its full frontal sex orgies.

Think of the children!

You can get free money from the Hot Coffee lawsuit.
http://www.gtasettlement.com/

AVAILABLE BENEFITS
If you have and submit: 	        What you may get:
Grand Theft AutoFirst Edition Disc 	Replacement Disc
Detailed Store Receipt 	           Cash payment up to $35.00
General Credit Card Statement or Check 	Cash payment up to $17.50
Disc/Purchase Details 	           Cash payment up to $10.00
No Disc/Purchase Details 	 Cash payment up to $5.00

Crazybear

EvilBadman wrote: »

No, advertising in game magazines in general is stupid. Also, who reads print anymore?

"Print is dead."

Come on, you know what movie that is from.

And back on topic, I can't get too mad at them for making money off of ad space as they enjoy making money just like the rest of us. But really, who does read print anymore? By the time it gets into your hands it's old news.

kenshindono

ya that is true. I should at least take comfort in the fact that in a few years print will be gone or down to like 10 dollar subscriptions, but still, youd think they would show some tact and responsibility on what ads they print. You can make the same amount of money putint up an ad for ax body spray that doesn't screw the industry

Magic Pink

The "ad" wasn't asking people to join the lawsuit. It's already decided. Rockstar has to pay damages to whoever bought the game before they removed the content. The ad-thing is just letting people know where to send stuff; I wouldn't be surprised if Rockstar themselves had to pay to put the ads in the mags.

HarshLanguage

Advertising the settlement in major venues (i.e. gaming magazines) would have been part of the settlement itself. Rockstar probably paid for the ads, at least indirectly.

Also, no gaming magazine, heck no magazine at all, is going to take responsibility for the content of ads they run. In general, the "business" side of the magazine will get and place ads without any input from or to the editorial side. And magazines are businesses, they're almost never going to turn down money just because their editorial team opposes the content. And even then, this isn't the sort of thing an editorial board might oppose.

It generally takes quite a lot to get a print ad outright rejected. Usually the only rejects are ads that fall in the categories of obscenity or illegality.

Also: wow.. the thread title really sucks

greeble

ZOMG I've been damaged by a hack done to a game that involves some retarded low res sex shit. I'm going to sue dell for selling me this laptop since I've viewed pornography on it. (Its not like you can accidently enable the hot coffee mod, you do it of your own free will)

HarshLanguage

greeble wrote: »

ZOMG I've been damaged by a hack done to a game that involves some retarded low res sex shit. I'm going to sue dell for selling me this laptop since I've viewed pornography on it. (Its not like you can accidently enable the hot coffee mod, you do it of your own free will)

Water under the bridge. Probably no reason to re-hash, and you're preaching to the choir anyway.

Greg USN

The thing that angers me about class action law suits is most of the money goes to the lawyers... Look at the fine print in the add. IIRC 95% of the money pays for leagal costs. Lawyers suck.

Italax

Are we hypocrites if we take the money?

Are we idiots if we don't?

slash000

Uh, this is exactly the kind of thing a gaming magazine should be publishing in their magazines.

It's not just gaming news, but it also directly affects a lot of the magazine's readers as part of the class.

Furthermore, if I were a part of the class, I'd certainly want to know about it. What better way to reach me than the magazines I'm likely to read?

Especially if it meant that I would get paid back money.

But even if I morally objected to forcing R* to pay out to people who bought the game over some ridiculous law suit, you're perfectly able to opt out of the class by simply doing nothing.


And I'm sorry, but doing nothing is hardly a burden on anyone.

slash000

kenshindono wrote: »

Maybe refuse this stuipd magazine a review copy of GTA IV

This is exactly the kind of thing that weakens game magazine/websites credibility.

slash000

Greg USN wrote: »

The thing that angers me about class action law suits is most of the money goes to the lawyers... Look at the fine print in the add. IIRC 95% of the money pays for leagal costs. Lawyers suck.

Maybe you missed this:

Attorneys’ Fees, Costs and Disbursements.

Finally, as mentioned above, only this past Friday, the Parties agreed on an amount to compensate Plaintiffs’ Counsel for attorneys’ fees and costs and disbursements in the amount of One Million Dollars ($1,000,000), the entire amount of which will be paid separate and apart from any amounts made available for payment to the Class and Class Representatives, as set forth above. This agreed upon amount includes approximately Forty-Five Thousands Dollars ($45,000) for costs and disbursements and approximately Nine Hundred Fifty Five Thousand Dollars ($955,000) for attorneys’ fees, a highly reasonable request and well within the range previously approved by this and other courts. A full and formal application for attorneys’ fees and costs and disbursements will be made prior to the proposed final fairness hearing for approval of this Settlement.

That's straight from page 11 of the Motion for Preliminary Approval document.




Also, in general, with Class action suits, most of the money (punitive damages particularly) go to the representatives. Small percentages of that usually go to the counsel. In huge cases, those small percentages can add up quickly, but that doesn't mean that "most of the money" goes to the lawyers, at all.


Besides. You have no idea what goes into a huge lawsuit anyway. A counsel gets paid $1,000,000 dollars for a case? You have no idea where that's going. It's not like a lawyer wakes up the morning of trial, slips into a suit, throws out a few arguments off the top of his head, and gets paid a million bucks for it. There is a hell of a lot of things that go into a case.

JihadJesus

titmouse wrote: »

http://www.gtasettlement.com/

AVAILABLE BENEFITS

No Disc/Purchase Details 	 Cash payment up to $5.00

Wait, wait, wait. They'll actually give me $5 just for saying "Yeah, I played GTA. Hot Coffee, uh, totally offended me".

As someone who thinks the whole thing was stupid, doesn't like GTA, and has never owned a copy of a GTA game, I think I deserve that $5. Because hey, why the fuck not?

slash000

Magic Pink wrote: »

The "ad" wasn't asking people to join the lawsuit. It's already decided. Rockstar has to pay damages to whoever bought the game before they removed the content. The ad-thing is just letting people know where to send stuff; I wouldn't be surprised if Rockstar themselves had to pay to put the ads in the mags.

As a matter of fact, everyone who bought the game is automatically part of the Class represented by the suit. You don't opt into Class action suits - you are given the choice to opt out. In this case, by simply doing nothing and not receiving your $5-$35.


It is a Rule of Civil Procedure that constituents of the class have to be reasonably informed (notice requirement) that they are part of the class and that their interests are at stake.

What's the best way to inform a lot of owners of a videogame? Publish the information in a gaming magazine.


This 'ad' is probably just in keeping with regulation.

ZombieAsuma

I'm pretty sure it made its way into EVERY gaming magazine in the last month. I get a free PSM subscription with my Gamefly account and it was in there. I hate to sound like a tool but I'll take the free money.

slash000

Federal Rules of Civil Procedure:

Rule 23(c)(2) requires that in a class action, all members of the class must be given "the best notice practicable under the circumstances, including notice to all members who can be identified through reasonable effort."


I can't imagine a much better way to provide Notice to the class than publishing notice in several gaming magazines.

Rook

Yeah, I can't remember where I read it (might have even been the PC Gamer podcast), but rockstar had to advertise the settlement.

The other thing to note is that the fine is fixed, so it doesn't matter if you sign up or not, they still lose all the money they were fined.

slash000

Rook wrote: »

Yeah, I can't remember where I read it (might have even been the PC Gamer podcast), but rockstar had to advertise the settlement.

The other thing to note is that the fine is fixed, so it doesn't matter if you sign up or not, they still lose all the money they were fined.

The damages are set. They are primarily set aside for the class affected. Anything left is used to distribute recovery to the "next best class" - future customers, until the recover is exhausted.

The purpose of this rule is to provide a punitive function against the Defendant in the absence of a relief function for any class members that may not come forward.




Basically, the OP here is having a kneejerk reaction and he doesn't know what the fuck he's talking about.

slash000

I hate to bring this up again, but I just have to:

kenshindono wrote: »

a horrible ad. On page 69 they actually put an add from the lawyers suing rockstar for the hot coffee mod! It requests for people to join the class action lawsuit against rockstar.

Wrong. Anyone who bought the game is automatically part of the class*. You opt out of class action suits, not into them.

I honestly couldn't belive this. Why would a gaming mag post an ad for such a frivilous, stuipd, lawsuit that hurts the gaming industry?

This is just a compliance with Federal Rules. Federal Rules setting up guidelines for class actions are designed in such a way to protect people who are injured small in damages, but in large quantities. Too little in damages to sue on their own behalf, but too large scale of an 'injury' to the class to go unchecked.

We can't uphold the rules in one place and ignore them in another or it would break the entire concept of class action suits and that ends up being bad for the public as a whole.

Anyone know how I can contact rockstar and let them know of this? I dont think it would make any difference but if they dont know about it i think they should be informed. Maybe refuse this stuipd magazine a review copy of GTA IV

They're in the law suit. They already know about it. Even if they don't know the circumstances - which I'd be very surprised if they did not - they do know that the Rules require the Plaintiff's party to put the class on notice as best they can - and that cost is shifted to themselves, the defendants, since the Plaintiffs won the case.

kenshindono wrote: »

you dont see a problem with supporting stupid frivilous lawsuits in a gaming magazine that should be suporting the industry, not hurting it?

They're complying with a rule.

whats next, political adds for jack thompson?

Yeah, because that's exactly what is happening here.

i sent an e-mail in the 'mouth off' link from rocckstargames.com.. not sure if thats the right venue

That's great. Now you're burdening their servers with pointless emails about things that they already know about.

kenshindono wrote: »

youd think they would show some tact and responsibility on what ads they print. You can make the same amount of money putint up an ad for ax body spray that doesn't screw the industry

Show tact and responsibility?

You know what's not responsible? Refusing to let gamers affected by the suit know what they are lawfully entitled to, and also informing them of their possible status in the lawsuit - a federal requirement - and allowing the gamers themselves to choose whether to opt out of the suit or not for whatever their own personal judgment may dictate.


Furthermore, running this 'ad' doesn't screw the industry. Whatever 'damage' has been done is over with, because the suit is over. Rockstar has to pay up one way or the other. You know what might help the industry? Letting gamers take that $5-$35 and put it back into the industry by spending more on games or hardware.


*subject to certain specific guidelines

Daedalus

Wow, this is more of a shitstorm than when ODCM printed that obnoxiously racist ad for some online game.

Daedalus

Oh, and Slash, anyone who bought the game and was offended by the "Hot Coffee" content is a member of the class. That's what the suit was about.

edit: from the settlement:

http://www.gtasettlement.com/fileclaim.aspx wrote:

In order to receive any benefits – a replacement disc and/or cash – you must file a Claim Form and swear under penalty of perjury that you:

* Bought a Grand Theft Auto: San Andreas First Edition Disc before July 20, 2005;
* Were offended and upset by the ability of consumers to use third party software and/or hardware to modify and alter the Grand Theft Auto: San Andreas First Edition Disc to display the Hot Coffee content;
* Would not have bought the Grand Theft Auto: San Andreas First Edition Disc had you known that consumers could modify and alter the game content; and
* Upon learning the game could be modified and altered, would have returned it to the place of purchase for a refund if you thought this was possible.

If you try and collect and don't meet those four criteria, you're committing a felony.

slash000

Daedalus wrote: »

Oh, and Slash, anyone who bought the game and was offended by the "Hot Coffee" content is a member of the class. That's what the suit was about.

edit: from the settlement:

http://www.gtasettlement.com/fileclaim.aspx wrote:

In order to receive any benefits – a replacement disc and/or cash – you must file a Claim Form and swear under penalty of perjury that you:

* Bought a Grand Theft Auto: San Andreas First Edition Disc before July 20, 2005;
* Were offended and upset by the ability of consumers to use third party software and/or hardware to modify and alter the Grand Theft Auto: San Andreas First Edition Disc to display the Hot Coffee content;
* Would not have bought the Grand Theft Auto: San Andreas First Edition Disc had you known that consumers could modify and alter the game content; and
* Upon learning the game could be modified and altered, would have returned it to the place of purchase for a refund if you thought this was possible.

If you try and collect and don't meet those four criteria, you're committing a felony.

Exactly. Anyone who meets this criteria is automatically part of the suit. If you meet this criteria, you can collect your $5-$35. Alternatively, if you meet this criteria, you can let the parties involved know that you are opting out of the class.

If you do not meet this criteria, then right, you are not part of the class. And yes, it is perjury if you lie about it.


I should have said, "anyone who bought the game and :

Bought a Grand Theft Auto: San Andreas First Edition Disc before July 20, 2005;
* Were offended and upset by the ability of consumers to use third party software and/or hardware to modify and alter the Grand Theft Auto: San Andreas First Edition Disc to display the Hot Coffee content;
* Would not have bought the Grand Theft Auto: San Andreas First Edition Disc had you known that consumers could modify and alter the game content; and
* Upon learning the game could be modified and altered, would have returned it to the place of purchase for a refund if you thought this was possible.

meets these criteria is automatically part of the class."


Or maybe I could have said, "Anyone who bought the game potentially but not necessarily could be part of the class."

But the purpose of my comment up there was that the way it works is not that you seek out your membership of the class, it's automatic, assuming you fit the guidelines of the class. You don't opt in, you opt out. The OP has it completely backwards.

Daedalus

Of course, the PC version of the uncensored edition of San Andreas eBays for far more than $35, so you might not want to partake in this settlement even if you really, honestly "were offended and upset by the ability of consumers to use third party software and/or hardware to modify and alter the Grand Theft Auto: San Andreas First Edition Disc to display the Hot Coffee content", "would not have bought the Grand Theft Auto: San Andreas First Edition Disc had you known that consumers could modify and alter the game content", and "upon learning the game could be modified and altered, would have returned it to the place of purchase for a refund if you thought this was possible."

Now, I, personally, am on record here and other places as saying that I wouldn't have bought the game if it couldn't be modified by consumers, so whatever.