Sign in / up

back to article Grand Theft Auto 4 maker sues Chicago transport chiefs

Take-Two Interactive is suing the Chicago Transit Authority after the metropolitan transportation organisation removed a series of Grand Theft Auto 4 ads from the city's bus shelters. The posters went up across the city on 22 April, the result of a $300,000 deal struck between Take-Two, and the CTA and its ad agency, Titan …

COMMENTS

House rules Send corrections
This topic is closed for new posts.
  1. Tim
    Black Helicopters

    Were they taken by surprise by the content?

    Its not as if they wouldnt have already known what it would have been about. Smells almost fraudulent if you ask me.

    I get a bit tired of all this GTA bashing. Nobody bats an eyelid if bruce willis robs cars and kills people, as long as he is a "copper". Anyone playing the game knows that the target of the protagonist is the same lowlife scum as in the diehard series of games, and coupled with the "hero's" ex-forces status, we should kind of see him in the same light. Sure you CAN kill innocents, but you won't gain anything and it just makes things harder.

    Sounds like someone needs a reality check.

    0 0
  2. paul
    Linux

    They love it really.

    All the noise from this fan fare just serves to promote the game even more.

    The people complaining about the GTA game are not the intended market, the people reading this article are ;)

    Tux, cause my linux box used to run vice city.

    0 0
  3. Ash
    Stop

    Bad taste?

    Kind of like advertising matches in a burns ward.

    Only they're not real matches, just pictures of one on a screen which you control using the WSAD keys.

    Pathetic.

    0 0
  4. John Macintyre

    title

    because of course giving people a playground within which to do these things instead of just going outside and doing it for real is a bad thing.

    i hear the negatives cry 'but lo, they shall do worse after practicing..'. Who the bloody hell practices stealing cars? they either do it or they don't, and it sounds like they already do it there so it could only remove some people from doing it for real...

    0 0
  5. Mark Broadhurst
    Dead Vulture

    Why?

    I really don't understand why Chicago Transport would do it ? its going to cause trouble and its not like its not being advertised else where.

    Should a kept the $300K and just run the ad's as agreed.

    0 0
  6. Sampler
    Joke

    Lawsuits?

    Shouldn't they drive a truck up outside the CTA's headquarters and detonate or something?

    0 0
  7. Mark

    Hmmm

    What about movies? Bourne trilogy has a lot in common with the content of GTA, but I don't think the ads for that were removed.

    0 0
  8. Mr B
    Coat

    Waiting for the bus ...

    ... steal a car instead. Is CTA scared of losing business ???

    /mine's the one with smoking barrels sticking out

    0 0
  9. jai

    can't see what the fuss is about

    as you say, the adverts don't actually show any of the in-game behaviour - it's just a poxy local news trying to get themselves into the national press

    and besides, there's only a _couple_ of missions where you have to track someone to the train stations and waste them on the platform

    0 0
  10. Steve

    No complaints?

    So the CTA broke a contract on the back of comments from a TV station? Not even a real citizen?

    Take-Two will have a field day in court.

    0 0
  11. steogede
    Black Helicopters

    How to have your cake and eat.

    Day 1 CTA agree to put up GTA ads for $300,000

    Day 2 GTA IV gains extra advertisement local from a TV station criticism of aforementioned ads.

    Day 3 CTA remove ads and the world gets to know about it.

    Day 4 Rockstar lodge suit against CTA and get more promotion.

    Day 5 (still to come) Rockstar win lawsuit, the ads get replaced and Rockstar recoup $300,000+costs.

    Conspiracy theory icon because I reckon these guys are on the Rockstar payroll, along with 'Jack "GTA IV is worse than polio" Thompson' and 'Katherine "GTA IV players are bad fathers and husbands" Kersten'.

    0 0
  12. Anonymous Coward
    Jobs Horns

    First nice weekend in 5+ months

    The big motivation was the local fox affiliate was reporting a rash of shootings and said the obvious motivation was the video game. Even though it wasn't released.

    My assumed reason for the amount of shootings was the fact that it was the first nice weekend in Chicago since at least October. So everyone was parting outside, drinking, etc.

    But the cause they come up with is some ads about a video game....

    Steve Jobs because Jack Thompson isn't on the list.

    0 0
  13. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    Good

    I am a Chicagoan and I am embarrassed that the ads were pulled. I am not a fan of the GTA games (abysmal control/camera), but this is an extremely clear cut case that will cost the CTA money it does not have. The CTA infringed upon the free speech rights of the advertiser. The ads did not portray illegal activity or violence. Considering the budget crunch the CTA has been going through for several years now, inviting expensive litigation in this manner was an utterly stupid move on the part of CTA brass. I hope those who made this ignorant decision lose their jobs.

    As an Illinois taxpayer, I am way beyond sick of footing the bill for our politicians' legislative and policy attacks on video games.

    0 0
  14. Brendan
    Coat

    Please don't sue the CTA

    They have enough financial problems as it is already. They don't need this on top of it...our trains and buses already run slowly enough.

    Besides, I can't see how this action possibly violates Take-Two's right to free speech. It's very possibly a breach of contract (don't know, haven't seen the contract) but there is no right to free speech as it concerns advertising on the CTA. They have the right to accept and reject advertising as they see fit.

    Mine's the one with the CTA Transit Card in it...

    -Brendan, Chicago

    0 0
  15. kain preacher

    @Brendan •

    Free speech issue comes from the fact that CTA is a government agency. CTA would of just been better of not accepting the money

    0 0
  16. NoCo37
    IT Angle

    @@Brendan

    The CTA is a private organization.

    I have to agree with the other Chicago residents... Please don't make the CTA spend too much in court costs. They have enough financial issues already...

    0 0
  17. kain preacher

    @@@Brendan

    History

    The Chicago Transit Authority (CTA) is an independent governmental agency created by state legislation. The CTA began operating on October 1, 1947, after it acquired the properties of the Chicago Rapid Transit Company and the Chicago Surface Lines. On October 1, 1952, CTA became the sole operator of Chicago transit when it purchased the Chicago Motor Coach system.

    Taken straight from CTA web site. it is a gov agency

    http://www.transitchicago.com/welcome/overview.html

    0 0
  18. Henry Wertz Gold badge

    Well..

    I would say either the CTA should have to show the ads OR return the $300,000, personally. They can't really expect to pocket $300,000 and not display ads. They really shouldn't be required to do both (return $300k and show an ad).

    0 0
  19. Anonymous Coward
    Black Helicopters

    $300k for bus shelter ads?

    Call me a cyncical adman, but it sounds like a publicity stunt arranged between CTA and GTA.

    i.e. $50k for advertising, $250k for you to make a fuss and cause more publicity...???

    0 0
  20. Dave Edmondston
    Black Helicopters

    Nothing to do with this story, but...

    ...reading the comments here; just realised that this icon is a black helicopter. Always thought it was an angry bunny - stare at it, you'll see

    :-)

    0 0
  21. Ed Arnold
    Pirate

    Life in a Dictatorship

    The point that is being missed is that Chicago is not your usual city, but a dictatorship run by Mayor-for-Life Richard M. Daley, aka King Richard the Second. If something in the city happens suddenly, and in complete disregard for the law, you can be certain it originated in the Mayors office. I assume somebody told Richie that the city was taking heat over the 'violent' adverts, so the order came out and the ads came down. The city will now spend a couple of million tax-payer dollars (called 'chump-change') defending the action in court, the legal fees all going to firms who are FODM (Friends of Da Mayor)

    Situation normal, nothing to see here, shut your mouth and move along...

    0 0
This topic is closed for new posts.