Take-Two sues over pulled GTA IV ads
Chicago Transit Authority slapped with suit.
Take-Two is seeking legal damages from the Chicago Transit Authority after it decided to pull Grand Theft Auto IV ads from buildings and buses around the city.
The publisher claims a violation of both its free speech rights and a contractual agreement, according to GameSpot.
"Although we prefer to resolve these issues amicably," said a Take-Two spokesperson, "The CTA has refused to discuss with us its outrageous decision to pull advertising for the critically acclaimed game Grand Theft Auto IV while running ads for other forms of popular entertainment with similar content, including mature-themed TV shows and R-rated movies."
Take-Two is after around USD 300,000 in compensation as its six-week campaign of 385 ads had only just begun.
The Chicago Transit Authority, one of the largest mass transit operators in the whole of North America did you know, decided to remove the GTA IV adverts because of a previous problem with Grand Theft Auto: San Andreas.
Adverts for this 2004 title provoked many to complain, but the campaign had run its course before the CTA could do anything about it.
The Chicago Transit Authority has said it will not charge Take-Two for the aborted GTA IV campaign.
You may also like...
-
Dear Esther Review
-
Motorola Xoom 2 Tablet Reviews
-
Total War: Shogun 2: Fall of the Samurai gameplay
-
Happy Action Theater Review
-
ModNation Racers: Road Trip Review
-
Sony explains PlayStation Vita game price strategy
-
Why Devs Owe You Nothing
-
Rockstar mulling LA Noire 2 development
-
Call of Duty: Black Ops has best game ending ever, says Guinness World Records
-
Sony confirms PS Vita 1st Party digital only game prices
-
3DS Ambassador Super Mario Bros. game updated
-
The Witcher 2: Enhanced Edition Xbox 360 trailer
-
Face-Off: Final Fantasy 13-2
-
Mojang: no plans for Minecraft on Vita
-
DICE working on multiple Battlefield 3 fixes
-
Latest SSX footage shows off Moby
-
Halo 4 Master Chief action figure flaunts new suit design
-
Who Killed Rare?
-
Digital Foundry: PS3 Skyrim Lag Fixed?
-
EGTV: Eurogamer playtests PlayStation Vita
-
Uncharted: Golden Abyss trailer readies for launch
-
Gotham City Impostors Review
-
Mass Effect 3 Demo: The First 20 Minutes
-
Infinity Blade's Chair: "we're in the golden age of gaming"
-
Apple begins Foxconn factories inspections









Comments (26) Latest comment 4 years ago
Comments threads automatically close after 30 days, but please feel free to continue chatting on the forum!
Comment below viewing threshold Show
Comment below viewing threshold Show
Games = 1
real life nonsense = 0
a good start to the week (for a change)
Comment below viewing threshold Show
They were nothing outrageous just the same pictures of game characters style that has been used for all other adverts.
Kotaku and gamepolitics have photos if you want to see them.
Comment below viewing threshold Show
Comment below viewing threshold Show
It's a fair point and I like what they're trying to accomplish, but it could so easily back-fire on the cause ...
Comment below viewing threshold Show
Comment below viewing threshold Show
Comment below viewing threshold Show
Comment below viewing threshold Show
Comment below viewing threshold Show
Comment below viewing threshold Show
Absolutely. My initial thought was "well it sucks, but a business can choose to carry or deline any advert it wants surely?". I guess the only difference here is backing out of a contract, as you say.
Comment below viewing threshold Show
Of course with a name like Chicago Transit Authority there may be links to the state, the city or some other public authority so the first amendment may well be applicable or at least arguably applicable. Of course breach of contract is probably the argument that will win it and the first amendment stuff is just useful background to get judge and/or jury on side.
Comment below viewing threshold Show
Comment below viewing threshold Show
T2 is trying to come up with excuses for low-sales, maybe.
[link url=http://www.alleyinsider.com/2008/5/is_gta_iv _take_two_s_savior_ttwo_
]http://ww w.alleyinsider.com/2008/5/is_gt...[/link]
PS that's low from the shareholder point of view, not geek on street
Comment below viewing threshold Show
Comment below viewing threshold Show
@Goffee
The game really hasn't been out long enough for accurate sales figures to be realeased... sheesh, give them some time.
Comment below viewing threshold Show
The CTA needs the money badly so it must be getting a lot of complaints esp since violence/deaths among the youth is up in the city when the overall murder/violence rate is down. I known VGs do not cause violent crime but reminders of violence will not benefit anyone esp when a 5 year old was just shot. This is a business decision and not censorship.
Comment below viewing threshold Show
Have a look at the pictures of the so called "offensive" adverts. They are simply pictures of the main characters in the game. There are no guns and no depiction of violence in them at all!
So your argument doesn't really hold up... It is not the content of the ads, but the content of the game that is being advertised that has caused them to remove the ads.
That is not acceptable and that is why they are being sued. Why do they continue to advertise R-rated movies and TV series' which have graphic depictions of violence, far more realistic than anything in GTA (in the film/TV series - not on the ads themselves), but refuse to advertise this game anymore? AFTER agreeing to do it in the first place? It is hypocritical and they deserve to get sued.
Comment below viewing threshold Show
fuck, thats awful good of them...
lol
Comment below viewing threshold Show
Comment below viewing threshold Show
Comment below viewing threshold Show
It just occurred to me, I wonder if the title CTA sounding a lot like GTA has any bearing at all. They don't say what sort of complaints they received the first time around. Maybe customer confusion was part of the deal?
In any event, its not like the they just said no this time. They accepted the advertising and THEn changed their minds, which is probably core to the whole affair.
Comment below viewing threshold Show
Comment below viewing threshold Show
Comment below viewing threshold Show
Comment below viewing threshold Show
Seriously, every gamer knows about it.
Oh well, sue them anyway. Why not, eh?