Lunacy proceedings
Excellent! LMFAO!
"This is the best thing to happen to me in a long, long time. Check my filings, sweetie." Gaming-crazed attorney Jack Thompson may be best known for suing 2 Live Crew and the makers of the Bully video game, but, as the good folks at GamePolitics noted yesterday, this tough-as-nails litigator still finds the time to cruise gay …
...and maybe reassuring, but nobody here should forget that *this does not matter*. The mainstream press will NOT report it, because it makes them look like fools for taking him seriously - and it prevents them from running more breathless stories (never a more appropriate moniker) about how games are making kids into murderers.
Thompson is untouchable unless something so serious it can't be ignored happens, and that's unlikely (even if he were jailed the mainstream media could easily pretend it didn't happem. And who'd know?). So all of this, while very satisfying, is completely meaningless in the larger context of Thompson's power to encourage censorship of video games.
And that's probably why he's laughing, sweetie.
There were some quality double-entendres in that article. "Hardened activist", "gavel", "a hard time", and mention of grabbing something by the hand. Eventually I started to see a double-entendre in every word, even "the" and "court", and now I find it hard to look at the spaces between the words without thinking of a crevice. Good job.
I don't like censorship , I think Jack should be allow to post legal images.
It would be a bit ironic for us gamers not to support Jack in his attempts to stop censorship in this case. :)
The irony of jack being a content pirate, who then shares to all, is kind of sweet, too. lol
Reminds me of the following story: my friend X was being sued for libel by Y. However, Y ran around showing the libel to everyone and shouting "look what X said about me!". The judge threw out the case on the grounds that Y was injuring himself.
Thomson is doing the same, prurient thing: "If you search carefully you can find these terrible pics! Look at this! Aren't you injured?"
I'm also reminded of an uptight person who complained her neighbour was flashing her by walking about naked in his house. A policeman turned up, looked out of her window and said "but you can't even see into his house from this angle",
"You can if you climb on top of this cupboad".
It appeared to me from the judge's PDF that he is simply order this nutjob to explain why the documents were either not filed under seal, with permission of the court, or why links themselves wouldn't suffice instead of spamming the public court with porn. I would imaging the first options to be normal procedure, but no lawyer am I.
At the least he should be disbarred for being a crappy lawyer -- since when is poking the judge in the eye with a stick a good idea when your own livelihood is at stake?