"Grand Theft Auto: San Andreas"

The “Grand Theft Auto: San Andreas” case is one that, honestly, made me a little bit disgusted. This case came about when a grandmother bought her fourteen year old grandson a copy of “Grand Theft Auto: San Andreas.” Frankly, everyone knows that the Grand Theft Auto games are known for intense violence and criminal activity, including murder. “Grand Theft Auto: San Andreas” particularly came out in October 2004 and was rated “M” for Mature. The “M” means that the game is for those who are seventeen years of age and older. Florence Cohen’s grandson was not seventeen. After a flow of negative publicity from the sexual hidden scenes, the Entertainment Software Rating Board changed the rating to “AO”, which means, Adults Only.
After purchasing the game, Florence was completely shocked and horrified to find out that the game had some sexual hidden scenes in it. She was so outraged by the game that she felt it necessary to sue the company that created the game, Rockstar Games. Cohen’s lawyer said that no parent would knowingly buy their child a video game that was for Adults Only. The lawsuit was successful and Cohen won her case.
Rockstar games decided to cooperate with the probe and pleaded guilty. “Rockstar Games and Take Two Interactive regret that consumers may have been exposed to content that was not intended to be accessible in the playable version of ‘Grand Theft Auto: San Andreas’,” it said in a statement. “Going forward, the company will refine the process by which it edits games and will enhance the protection of its game code to prevent such future modifications,” it said. Rockstar games said it had ceased production of the game in the controversial form and were working on a version of the game with sexual content, suitable for an “M” rating.
The House voted 355-21 for a resolution which asked the FTC to investigate the company. Sen. Hillary Clinton then asked the FTC to investigate Rockstar games, saying that the company had “gamed the ratings system” by concealing sex scenes in the game that can be unlocked by computer programs available on the Internet. Wal-Mart, Target, Best Buy and Circuit City have pulled “Grand Theft Auto: San Andreas” — 2005’s top-seller among console games — from their shelves following the rating change.

Response To Flip Beats Productions

Flip Beats Productions seems to have dealt with lawyers in the past. I feel that their feelings towards lawyers are relevant and almost in sync with my own. Their experience with lawyers in the past has brought them to feel both positively and negatively towards lawyers. "I hate to stereotype, but the criminal lawyers I have come across were very keniving, a bit sneaky, cold-hearted, with some sort of agenda," says Flip Beats. I think we all feel this way and though it might be stereotyping, hey, it is their job. See, lawyers are supposed to be that way. If they were not, they would not be any good at what they do. One has to be keniving, or what I would call persuasive in order to be a lawyer. Some of the most problematic kids grow up to become phenomenal lawyers. "There are many lawyers who really want to help you and there are those who just want your money," states Flip Beats. If I may recall my own writing, I also believe that some lawyers really do want to help you and look forward to working with them in the future. I agree with most of Flip Beats Productions' opinions and would say they probably have the correct idea about lawyers in general.

MySpace Hoax

The case of Megan Meier is most definitely a very sad and tragic one. The creator of "Josh's" MySpace profile was charged with a three felonies on four counts of computer fraud. I do feel that the creator of "Josh's" profile was wrong and rather sick to do what she had done. Had the creator been another teenage girl, the incident still would have been sickening but not quite has harsh as it seems due to the fact that the profile was created by another teenage girl's MOTHER. If you are the mother of a teenage girl, you should not still be interested in petty middle school bullshit. Not only did her actions cause a young girl to kill herself, they also set a horrible example for her own daughter. "The term false pretenses describes a broad category of crimes that involve activities intended to deceive others by making false claims..." (Ch. 3, Pg. 34, Business Law Sixth Edition, Liuzzo) I feel this is relevent because "Josh" was a false claim, along with everything "he" said to Megan. The whole page was created with an intent to deceive Megan Meier. Megan's death was most definitely accidental. We all know that "Josh's" creator did not mean to kill young Megan but it still happened. I feel that the accident could have easily been avoided. "But the concept of unavoidable accident is intended to focus attention on whether an accident could have been avoided if the person alleged to be responsible had acted reasonably." (Ch. 4, Pg. 51, Essentials of Business Law Sixth Edition, Liuzzo) In no way were "Josh's" mean messages supposed to lead Megan to kill herself, however, "Josh" knew that Megan was depressed. I suppose that to really feel as strongly as I do about this case, you have to understand the psychology of a teenage girl. Teenage girls are very mean to each other and say nasty things about one another all the time. Being a teenager is a very vulnerable time in one's life - you feel like you don't fit in, people judge and pick at you constantly, you are uncomfortable in your own skin, you feel like you can trust no one. This is why so many teenage girls face depression. Every woman knows what it is like to be a teenage girl, which is why it so hard for me to understand why "Josh" did the things she did. In this case, "Josh" was charged with 3 felonies and 4 counts of computer fraud. I feel that she was correctly accused and should be in trouble for doing what she has done.

Lawyers

How do I feel about lawyers? Most people, when asked this question, would give you an angry, hateful response. A lot of people are not too fond of lawyers and usually crack jokes at their expense. However, I feel differently. I have never had a bad experience with any lawyer. Maybe that is because I have never had to go to court and have never run into any problems with the law. I, being only eighteen years old, have yet to even receive a speeding ticket. So, for now, I am alright with lawyers.
Being just “alright” with lawyers will probably change for me as I grow older and branch out into the business world. My plans after receiving my degree are to open up a “head-shop” (or whatever you would like to call a store for smoking devices and clothing) which means I will most likely become rather fond of lawyers over the next few years. I go around and talk to many owners of shops like the one I intend to own one day to see what it is like. Most of my responses are “It’s very difficult.” I have heard from several store owners that the law likes to come and “mess with” your company due to the merchandise sold and the lifestyle advocated by these shops. I could see how this would make my future career difficult.
So, by being “messed with” by the laws, the police, the FEDs, whatever you would like to call them, I will have to encounter many lawyers. With several Californian lawyers on my side, I think I will do just fine with my business. Today, the laws have changed a great deal making it easier to own a store that provides smoking devices and “counter-culture-influenced” clothing. It will be difficult to run a business like the one I choose to run as long as marijuana is illegal. With new open-minded medical marijuana laws being passed more frequently and a more accepting generation up and coming, I hope my business will become more acceptable.
So do I like lawyers? Not necessarily. But I do feel that they will help me in the future.