No more 'Grand Theft Scratchy' in Simpsons Game
by Scott Jon Siegel 
{ Oct 23rd 2007 at 6:00AM }
All other content in the trailer remains the same, meaning that either Rockstar only really had a guff with the name, or that EA hasn't heard the last from the Liberty City attorneys.
Get a WordPress.com Blog
Reader Comments (Page 1 of 1)
Cabcru @ Oct 23rd 2007 6:28AM
Given the GTA series have always had parody high on it's list of USPs, it's rather churlish of them to baulk at someone returning the favour.
spoo @ Oct 23rd 2007 6:35AM
"THIS GAME CONTAINS PARODIES OF THIRD PARTY INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY AND OTHER MATERIAL. THIS GAME IS NOT AUTHORIZED OR APPROVED BY OR OTHERWISE AFFILIATED OR ASSOCIATED WITH THE OWNERS OF THAT CONTENT . THERE IS NO AFFILIATION OR ASSOCIATION BETWEEN THE SIMPSONS GAME, ELECTRONIC ARTS INC. AND ITS LICENSORS WITH THOSE THIRD PARTIES."
Sad....Coffee is served hot, sad.
daddycool @ Oct 23rd 2007 6:52AM
Dick move. Rockstar loses points for this one. Not a huge deal but still.
mafafu @ Oct 23rd 2007 6:59AM
Rockstar is taking classes from the Sony school of public relations.
Poisoned Al @ Oct 23rd 2007 8:54AM
I know who your avatar is. God I'm sad!
mafafu @ Oct 23rd 2007 11:23AM
Any fellow Discworld fan is too righteous to be sad.
Babel @ Oct 23rd 2007 11:58AM
Lord Vetinari, how nice to meet you!
*sobs gently into hands*
mafafu @ Oct 23rd 2007 3:54PM
"Do not let me detain you"
Dei76 @ Oct 23rd 2007 7:35AM
I don't understand this, Grand theft auto is a recognised crime, right? As in you can be fined for 'a grand theft auto'. If this is correct, then surly Rockstar can't legally own the name?
Skeffington @ Oct 23rd 2007 7:42AM
I think it's not just the name but also how you use it. For instance, if your name is McDonald, the fast food company is not going to ask you to change it. But if you open a restaurant and give it your name, then yeah, they probably will.
ssuk @ Oct 23rd 2007 8:27AM
Brand recognition. In one regard, it's smart. Because if EA puts "Grand Theift Scratchy" in the game, and good old Wacko-Jacko gets his hands on the game, first person whom that sad sack of shit will start spewing out that EA is trying to make kids buy Rockstar brand products deemed unsuitable for them.
On the other hand, this could show weakness in that Rockstar is a bit bitchy towards America's least favourite development studios (EA).
Skeffington @ Oct 23rd 2007 7:38AM
'The Simpsons' is one of the very few shows that has gained acceptance from a very broad side of the political and social spectrum. I can only see benefits in having GTA 'parodied' in the game.
I completely fail to see why Rockstar put a stop to it, other than a complete and utter desire to dig themselves into a hole and to send a clear message that they have no sense of humor whatsoever.
Maybe they were concerned that the section of the game would reinforce negative stereotypes towards GTA and Rockstar? Even so, I don't think that's a good reason and it's just very botched PR at best.
Brucie B @ Oct 23rd 2007 7:53AM
ROCKSTAR YOUR GAY!!!
Jcarpio @ Oct 23rd 2007 8:18AM
So who's rockstar's gay? i'm just wondering =)
See what i'm using there? they're called apostrophes.
As far as GTA, so I guess Rockstar can dish it out, but can't take it. Sad.
WhoMe @ Oct 23rd 2007 8:09AM
Total weak sauce Rockstar... epic fail.
guidedbyvoip @ Oct 23rd 2007 8:16AM
http://straylight.law.cornell.edu/supct/html/92-1292.ZO.html
QUOTE: "germ of parody lies in the definition of the Greek parodeia, quoted in Judge Nelson's Court of Appeals dissent, as "a song sung alongside another." 972 F. 2d, at 1440, quoting 7 Encyclopedia Britannica 768 (15th ed. 1975). Modern dictionaries accordingly describe a parody as a "literary or artistic work that imitates the characteristic style of an author or a work for comic effect or ridicule," [n.12] or as a
"composition in prose or verse in which the characteristic turns of thought and phrase in an author or class of authors are imitated in such a way as to make them appear ridiculous." [n.13] For the purposes of copyright law, the nub of the definitions, and the heart of any parodist's claim to quote from existing material, is the use of some elements of a prior author's composition to create a new one
that, at least in part, comments on that author's works. See, e. g., Fisher v. Dees, supra, at 437; MCA, Inc. v. Wilson, 677 F. 2d 180, 185 (CA2 1981). If, on the contrary, the commentary has no critical bearing on the substance or style of the original composition, which the alleged infringer merely uses to get attention or to avoid the drudgery in working up something fresh, the claim to fairness in borrowing from another's work diminishes accordingly (if it does not vanish), and other factors, like the extent of its commerciality, loom larger. [n.14] Parody needs to mimic an original to make its point, and so has some claim to use the creation of its victim's (or collective victims') imagination, whereas satire can stand on its own two feet and so requires justification for the very act of borrowing. [n.15] See Ibid.; Bisceglia, Parody and Copyright Protection: Turning the Balancing Act Into a Juggling Act, in ASCAP, Copyright Law Symposium, No. 34, p. 25 (1987)."
That said, I can understand why the changes were made...attorney's and settlements aren't cheap. However, Rockstar I think mocks plenty of IP in its game. On the radio you have Toys R Us and Howard Stern parodies, and that was just GTA3. Anyone else remember particular Rockstar send-ups in the GTA series?
Zsavior @ Oct 23rd 2007 8:23AM
I am so glad these guys proved to be the dirt bags I always thought they were when I saw their games. Highlighting the worst of society, and exploiting it for a buck, never seemed to be a good story and game play to me. Now look at them defending their parodying of movies like Colors, and South Central by going after the Simpson's Game. Do they really believe any gamer over the age of 18 doesn't know their ideas are huge bites from movies? Running over a hooker doesn't mean your story is original and innovative even if Gamespot tells you differently Rockstar.
Vegeta (aka Ska Oreo) @ Oct 23rd 2007 8:39AM
ummm I'm pretty sure that most games are huge bites from movies.
Vidikron (FU) @ Oct 23rd 2007 10:17AM
Say what you want, but GTA3 DID define the sandbox genre. All games of that type are still compared to the GTA series and they are good games, whether you agree with the content or not.
That said, this move by R* sucks. Hypocrits. I really want GTA IV, but this is making me think twice.
Martin @ Oct 23rd 2007 10:37AM
I have no problem with GTA's content, but I think the games suck.
Word of the street(IDF-Digital Ruler). @ Oct 23rd 2007 12:03PM
Finally, seriously I don't know why GTA games have such a high rating, I have been playing GTA since I was 9 yes I mean GTA 1 and It sucked well it was funny for about 10 minutes, GTA 2 it was even worst I never played 3 but I bought GTA SA the supposed successor and it was awful the story went no where and the controls were God damn awful.
Again funny for 10 minutes but you can't help to feel dead inside, GTA is effing overrated.
About this well I hate Rockstar a lot for releasing an overrated game and convincing everyone it was worth 30$ when it wasn’t worth even for 5$ I hate Rockstar for making controversy crap and again convince everyone is worth it *cough manhunt *cough and I hate Rockstar for this because not only they are attacking America favorite non-prehistoric cartoon family but for being such hypocrites.
Burn in hell Rockstar you and GTA SA.
Vegeta (aka Ska Oreo) @ Oct 23rd 2007 8:42AM
Yeah I'm disappointed in rockstar for this. Even so, I'm still going to buy GTA.
Savok @ Oct 23rd 2007 8:51AM
Of all the childish...
Hey Rockstar, better threaten Marvel as well
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ultimates#.22Grand_Theft_America.22_.28The_Ultimates_2_.237-13.29
baby sea tuna @ Oct 23rd 2007 8:57AM
Waaaaaah. I think we should all chip in and send R* a case of Summer's Eve to wash out their sandy vaginas.
So.fucking.lame.
Martin @ Oct 23rd 2007 10:37AM
I'm not sure what a sandy vagina has to do with anything, but I thought it was funny as hell.
mafafu @ Oct 23rd 2007 11:25AM
Sandy vagina has now become my put-down of choice. Thank You.
Tonbo @ Oct 23rd 2007 9:00AM
Rockstar doesn't have a strong legal case given the Supreme Court's recognition of parody as "Fair Use" even when done for profit.
Campbell v. Acuff-Rose Music, Inc., 510 U.S. 578 (1994)
However, they can delay the release of the game indefinitely through litigation, effectively strong arming EA into giving them what they want.
What? Rockstar using mob tactics?
Not surprising perhaps, but still an a-hole move.
Psyclerk @ Oct 23rd 2007 9:00AM
Maybe they played the demo of the Simpsons game, realized it was awful and decided they wanted to distance themselves.
meledeo @ Oct 23rd 2007 9:01AM
If Rockstar is doing this simply because they don't want parodies of their game showing up, then yes... screw that. However, if they are doing it because this is a Teen rated game that will be marketed to audiences that include younger people... well I can understand with all their legal problems if they don't want that hanging over them. It's all about perception in the legal system, unfortunately.
Doug Kaplan @ Oct 23rd 2007 9:26AM
Didn't GTA mock True Crime in one of their games?
Freezer @ Oct 23rd 2007 9:39AM
A satirical take on GTA? I thought that's what Simpsons: Hit And Run was!
derrickgott007 @ Oct 23rd 2007 9:50AM
This is a giant case of the pot calling the kettle black.
DaiMac79 @ Oct 23rd 2007 10:12AM
Yeah, this is _almost_ as dumb as Fox News trying to sue the show over their satirical news crawl bit, not quite that stupid but close.
Hirsbrunner @ Oct 23rd 2007 10:20AM
It was said in an earlier thread, I forget by who, but "Grand Theft Otto" would have been so much better.
It still would've been taken out, apparently.
Rockstar=yeast-laden coochie
WiNG @ Oct 23rd 2007 10:42AM
Someone needs to post the email address of whoever is responsible so we can start a peaceful campaign of flooding that inbox with criticism and personal attacks.
Kibbles @ Oct 23rd 2007 11:42AM
Break the circle and stop the movement, the wheel is thrown to the ground
Just remember it might start rolling and take you right back around
You're all fools!
The Mob Rules!
Aberu @ Oct 23rd 2007 12:11PM
Lawyers are obviously running that company now, not gamers. They sit there and fight hard to parodize every industry, and every city, and get taken to court, and look how the hypocrites behave when the Simpsons take a shot at THEM.
Sean @ Oct 23rd 2007 12:23PM
So lame.
Hellfish @ Oct 23rd 2007 1:40PM
As someone else pointed out above, the Simpsons game looks to be chocked full of suck. On top of that, Grand Theft Scratchy is NOT a parody, it's a weak ass reference. Something has to make a joke or be funny to be considered parody.
ThornedVenom @ Oct 23rd 2007 10:42PM
If the Simpsons game managed to save Grand Theft Scratchy after the Rockstar dispute, I would have so played GTS and boycotted GTA.
Yes, I'm that retarded to affect my gameplay according to relationships between developing companies.
dave @ Oct 24th 2007 12:12AM
It makes me laugh.... but back in like 97-98 EA bought out the rights to a favorite game of mine at the time. "Aliens Online" Which was hosted by "gamestorm"
The game was pretty much like the movie "Aliens". EA bought it,... canned it. And pissed off many people. They didnt seem to care.... I even knew people who wrote letters to EA, asking them to sell the rights to them.... EA would not, and the game hasn't been back in population since. Freaking Corporate Big wigs.... all they care about is the mighty dollar, and how fat their going to get. So to EA..... you got what you deserved. Karma's a.... well you know.
I guess you can say I have a biased opinion against EA, and everything they represent. Like buying the NFL rights, so NO-ONE else, can even make a game with the active players.... this world is so screwed up. From Iraq, to video games, everyone just cares about their own self.... Could you even imagine a world where people actually helped each other??? Well I can, and it would be alot better then this.... People? ha!
ok... enough from me :)