fujishig

http://arstechnica.com/news.ars/post/20060216-6193.html

Great, who's next? I'm really surprised that the stock dropped so much because of the Hot Coffee mod... I guess public outcry does work, even when sales go up. go figure.

neiname

Fuck the shareholders. So they condone investing in a game manufacturer that produces a game that allows the player to shoot a cop's head off but cry foul when hot coffee happened. Same FU goes to the board member who quit because she was outraged by the hot coffee footage.

Josh H

Store has to pull the game from shelves due to the hot coffee scene, so I'm sure that hurt profits.

That's why the shareholders are pissed in all likelihood. Not because they are opposed to the content. They invested to make money.

spainlinx0

When you invest in a company that seems to specialize in making "controversial" games you have to figure that into the risk when making the purchase. Manhunt, State of Emergency, Grand Theft Auto. This isn't Elmo Learns Numbers here. You have no right to complain when a controversial game company gets a game pulled for being to controversial.

Josh H

I wasn't saying it was a reasonable lawsuit.

I was just saying that the suit wasn't due to moral objections over the content which was implied by neiname's post.

Joe Molotov

It wasn't pulled for having controversial content. It was pulled because they hid it.

Anubis2005X

If you wanna be technical, I believe it was pulled from most stores shelves because it was re-rated to Adult, which was changed due to the hidden content.

spainlinx0

I don't know if that really negates my point here though. You can't be surprised that a title from this company is going to get pulled every now and then, and I'm just tired of these people feigning ignorance because they are trying to cash in.

BobDole42

While you may not agree with the shareholders bringing the lawsuit, it seems to have a solid legal basis, at least from how it has been described. This is not that different than a situation where a company makes a misrepresentation of its finances and is subsequently forced to re-file a form 10k, 8k, etc. The legal theory is, the company made a misrepreentation of material fact (prohibited by Section 10b) that caused the shareholders to suffer a loss.

I understand that some people get annoyed with lawsuits in general, but this is actually a fairly common type of suit. If you're interested in learning more, the 10b5 Daily is a good blog with lots of information on derivative suits, PSLRA, etc. http://www.10b5daily.com/