Then a webcomic decided to give the money to charity anyway in his name, and got a C&D from the same lawyer.

all his complaining will only sell all the more copys of GTA4, remember when the church of england complained about resistance: fall of man?

heck, i may just get a copy solely to rub it in!

Jack Thompson if you closed down gta iv,we will caues a war with you and your comay.

we are the soviet from russia. CCCP

http://www.pollsb.com/polls/poll/2373/a-gta4-mission-apparently-targets-anti-gamer-lawyer-jack-thompson

Correction: It looks like Thompson signed it on page 6 and Take 2’s executive and attorney on page 7 even though pages 6 and 7 appear to be duplicate copies of the same page. Both parties should have signed the same page of the document.

In any case it appears the agreement has not yet been approved and enacted by the court which means that either party could withdraw from it.

It is not a certainty that document is the actual settlement agreement since although it appears to be a copy which was entered into the record, it hasn’t been enacted since it isn’t signed by both parties and the judge. Even though Thompson is the defendant in the lawsuit, it looks like something that Thompson drew up and filed since Take 2’s representative didn’t sign it.

In addition even if that is the agreement, in it the court is simply ordering that the case be dismissed so that Take 2 can’t sue Thompson again for the same claims. While the court does grant itself jurisidiction to enforce the agreement, that means that it would be the venue to litigate future disputes over the agreement. It does not enjoin the parties from violating the agreement, order either party to perform a specific act, or incorporate any references to the executory terms of the agreement. One or more of those things are usually necessary to seek civil-contempt remedies for the violation of a settlement agreement.

“I’d reassert my belief that contempt charges are the very least Thompson can expect.”

That is wrong. The least that Thompson can expect is nothing because Take 2 would first have to petition the court to enforce the agreement. It is not a certainty that Take 2 would do that because it’s not a perfunctory procedure without cost. Second, even if Take 2 does that, a hearing would be held to consider Take 2’s motion to compel settlement. Thompson would have the opportunity to defend himself against Take 2’s motion, and it is not a foregone conclusion that the motion would be granted (Thompson’s competency as a lawyer notwithstanding). Finally even if Take 2’s motion is granted, civil contempt would not necessarily be the remedy imposed by the court.

Looking at this document (and again, I’m no attorney) I see that Thompson cannot under the terms of this agreement, sue or threaten suit to block the sale or distribution of any game from Take Two or any of their subsidiaries. He retains all rights to criticize said games and their distribution, of course.

As ShadowAngel says, we again have no proof that this IS the final document. However, in this form, I’d reassert my belief that contempt charges are the very least Thompson can expect.

http://www.gamepolitics.com/images/legal/FL-T2-JT-settlement.pdf

… You’ll find a copy (at least I’m assuming) of the agreement in question in it’s full legal terms as linked from the article from Gamepolitics concerning it. Now, along with the author of this article, I’m no lawyer, but it seems to have been ordered by the “United States District Court for the Southern District of Florida.” Further it appears to be intended to be signed by a judge. Thus, to my limited knowledge of court agreements, making it a matter of court jurisdiction and not simply an agreement between two parties. The final Paragraph beginning with “Approved, Done and Ordered…” Would seem to indicate this.

This beign said, I fully understand and accept that the document linked can be a complete fabrication and since it is not signed by either Jack Thompson or the Presiding Judge, may not be the agreement in its final form. But, assuming that GP isn’t lying to us. There you have it.

And that including a Jtesque target in their game is bad taste on rockstar’s part. Whether it’s just a lame joke or scheme to stir up some controversy-type popularity it doesn’t reflect well on them, and that JT is the greater of two evils in this conflict.

But, I appreciate your take on it. Considering that neither of us knows what the EXACT terms of the settlement are, we can safely agree to disagree.

Are YOU a lawyer? That was filled with many legalities and… big… phrases… that would make your IQ at LEAST 180. (Then again, maybe I’m judging on my own stupidity)

But, seriously Phil, that was a great rant. You get a gold star.

1. If Thompson sues to block the distribution of GTA IV, he’s in violation of his settlement agreement, and at the very least can expect to be held in contempt.”

Apparently you either have no common sense or need more than a modicum of common sense if you believe #1 to be true. First, you don’t know the actual terms of the settlement agreement between Take 2 and Thompson because it was not publicly disclosed. So, Thompson may not be in violation of it if he attempts to block the sale of the game. Second, a settlement agreement is not imposed by the court, i.e. it is not a court order, but rather a contract between the two litigants. If a case is settled by the litigants, the plaintiff simply withdraws his original complaint. Violation of such a settlement agreement would not result in a contempt citation since such a settlement is not imposed by the court. However, it could reopen the door to litigation by one of the parties to the agreement.

“Now, I may not be a lawyer”

Well at least you got that part right.