<![CDATA[Kotaku: emailalert]]> http://tags.kotaku.com/assets/base/img/thumbs140x140/kotaku.com.png <![CDATA[Kotaku: emailalert]]> http://kotaku.com/tag/emailalert http://kotaku.com/tag/emailalert <![CDATA[Are The Beatles Coming to Rock Band 2 and Not Guitar Hero?]]> I just had an alert drop in my mailbox from MTV.

Apparently MTV Networks, owners of Harmonix, and Apple Corps Ltd, administrators of The Beatles releases of the 1960s, are holding a press conference tomorrow to make some announcement about an "exclusive agreement to develop a global music project."

The release lists a number of media contacts, including one of the main PR folks for Rock Band 2. This seems to back up what the Financial Times reported back in June. Though at the time it sounded like both Activision and Harmonix were wooing Apple Corps. Did Guitar Hero get the shaft or is another announcement, this one with Activision, hitting later this week? We'll update once we can needle out more official word.

Apple Corps Ltd. and MTV to Announce Exclusive Agreement to Develop Unprecedented Global Music Project

WHAT: Apple Corps Ltd. and MTV to announce an exclusive agreement to develop a global music project.

WHO: Jeff Jones, CEO of Apple Corps, Ltd.
Judy McGrath, Chairman and CEO of MTV Networks
Van Toffler, President of MTV Networks Music/Logo Group

WHEN: Thursday, October 30, 2008
2:00 pm UK Time, 10:00 am ET, 7:00 AM PT

About Apple Corps. Ltd.
Apple Corps Ltd. was founded by The Beatles in 1968 to look after the group's own affairs. The London-based company has administered the catalogue of The Beatles releases of the 1960s that have sold to date more than 600 million records, tapes and CDs. Since the 1990s Apple has piloted new Beatles projects that have become benchmarks for pioneering accomplishment and which have included The Beatles Anthology projects, the 28 million-selling album The Beatles 1 and the The Beatles LOVE show and CD. Further information on The Beatles' projects can be found at www.thebeatles.com.

About MTV Networks
MTV Networks, a unit of Viacom (NYSE: VIA, VIA.B), is one of the world’s leading creators of entertainment content, with brands that engage and connect diverse audiences across television, online, mobile, games, virtual worlds and consumer products. The company’s portfolio spans more than 150 television channels and 350 digital media properties worldwide, and includes MTV, VH1, CMT, Logo, Harmonix, Nickelodeon, Nick at Nite, Noggin, The N, AddictingGames, Neopets, COMEDY CENTRAL, Spike TV, TV Land, Atom, Gametrailers and Xfire.

]]>
http://kotaku.com/index.php?op=postcommentfeed&postId=5070599&view=rss&microfeed=true
<![CDATA[Nintendo Announce New DS: The Nintendo DSi]]> During their Fall Press Conference today, Nintendo have - as expected - announced a new version of the Nintendo DS. Called the Nintendo DSi, it eschews the GBA slot (boo!) in favour of a slight downsizing (it's a little thinner) and a range of improvements. The handheld's screens have been enlarged, and will now be 17% bigger (at 3.25 inches) than those found on the DS Lite. As for the rumoured additions, both have proven to be correct, with "audio enhancements" made to the handheld, while it will also now include a .3 megapixel (640x480) camera. And that's just the start of it.

The DSi also features an SD memory card slot, making it possible to take pictures with the DSi and then view them on the Nintendo Wii. The DSi features a built-in browser, and it's possible to download games and keep them on the DSi.


For digital delivery purchases, there is a DSi Shop, from which users can download DSiWare from. Pricing categories for the DSiWare are: Free, 200 points, 500 points and "Premium" or 800 points. Customers will get 1000 free points to spend at the DSi Shop that are good until March 2010.

The DSi will be released in Japan on November 1. It will retail for ¥18,900 (USD$180), and will be available in two colours, white and black. It will be released in other markets sometime "next year".

Liveblogging the Nintendo Press Conference Liveblog

[image]

]]>
http://kotaku.com/index.php?op=postcommentfeed&postId=5057870&view=rss&microfeed=true
<![CDATA[Jack Thompson Disbarred]]> Is it finally game over for Florida lawyer and violent video game opponent Jack Thompson? Judgment has been entered in the case that started last year and came to a head when Judge Dava Tunis recommended permanent disbarment for the bombastic, showboating law man. The court has approved the report and has ordered that JT is officially disbarred as of 30 days from today.

The Court approves the corrected referee's report and John Bruce Thompson is permanently disbarred, effective thirty days from the date of this order so that respondent can close out his practice and protect the interests of existing clients. If respondent notifies the Court in writing that he is no longer practicing and does not need the thirty days to protect existing clients, this Court will enter an order making the permanent disbarment effective immediately. Respondent shall accept no new business from the date this order is filed.

Note that Thompson still has a chance for a retrial, only due to court sanctions the motion must me submitted by a member of the Florida Bar in good standing, and I don't know that anyone wants to touch this one. It's also worth noting that along with disbarment, Thompson has been ordered to reimburse the Florida Bar fees amounting to $43,675.35. Ouch.

We've contacted both the Supreme Court of Florida and Jack Thompson for comment and will update the story if both or either respond.

UPDATE: Jack Thompson has responded to us, at length.

Supreme Court of Florida
THURSDAY, SEPTEMBER 25, 2008
CASE NOS.: SC07-80 and SC07-354
Lower Tribunal No(s).: 2005-70,305(11F),
2005-71,125(11F),
2006-70,570(11F),
2006-70,766(11F),
2006-70,909(11F),
2007-30,805(11F)
THE FLORIDA BAR vs. JOHN BRUCE THOMPSON
___________________________________________________________________
Complainant(s) Respondent(s)

The referee has filed a corrected report recommending that respondent, John Bruce Thompson, be permanently disbarred without leave to apply for readmission to The Florida Bar. Respondent submitted a petition for review of the referee's report. The Clerk did not accept the petition for review for filing. This action was in accord with this Court's opinion dated March 20, 2008, which sanctioned respondent for abusive filings and barred him from filing on his own behalf. The sanction opinion provided, in pertinent part: "the Clerk of this Court is hereby instructed to reject for filing any future pleadings, petitions, motions, documents, or other filings submitted by John Bruce Thompson, unless signed by a member in good standing of The Florida Bar other than himself." Fla. Bar v. Thompson, 979 So. 2d 917, 921 (Fla. 2008). The opinion also noted: "in sanctioning respondent, we are requiring him to retain qualified counsel so that his arguments might be properly presented through the appropriate procedures in the appropriate forum. We do not limit such counsel's ability to challenge the referee's findings and recommendations on review." Id. at 919.

Ignoring this bar on self-submitted filings, respondent has submitted numerous filings in violation of the sanction opinion, including the petition for review of the referee's report. The Clerk properly rejected each of these submissions. Thus, there being no authorized petition for review filed, and the time period to seek review has passed, the Court has treated this as an uncontested case. The Court has reviewed the 169-page corrected report of the referee filed on July 16, 2008, for sufficiency and has determined that permanent disbarment is merited on this record. (This report is posted on the Court's public website). The report Case Nos. SC07-80 and SC07-354

Page Two details the extensive misconduct of respondent and his complete lack of remorse. In her report, the referee states: Over a very extended period of time involving a number of totally unrelated cases and individuals, [r]espondent has demonstrated a pattern of conduct to strike out harshly, extensively, repeatedly and willfully to simply try to bring as much difficulty, distraction and anguish to those he considers in opposition to his causes. He does not proceed within the guidelines of appropriate professional behavior, but rather uses other means available to intimidate, harass, or bring public disrepute to those whom he perceives oppose him.

Among the extensive findings of fact presented in the report, the Court takes particular note of the following which occurred during the three-year period at issue in five counts in these cases: (1) respondent made false statements of material fact to courts and repeatedly violated a court order; (2) respondent communicated the subject of representation directly with clients of opposing counsel; (3) respondent engaged in prohibited ex parte communications; (4) respondent publicized and sent hundreds of pages of vitriolic and disparaging missives, letters, faxes, and press releases, to the affected individuals; (5) respondent targeted an individual who was not involved with respondent in any way, merely due to "the position [the individual] holds in state and national politics;" (6) respondent falsely, recklessly, and publicly accused a judge as being amenable to the "fixing" of cases; (7) respondent sent courts inappropriate and offensive sexual materials; (8) respondent falsely and publicly accused various attorneys and their clients of engaging in a conspiracy/enterprise involving "the criminal distribution of sexual materials to minors" and attempted to get prosecuting authorities to charge these attorneys and their clients for racketeering and extortion; (9) respondent harassed the former client of an attorney in an effort to get the client to use its influence to persuade the attorney to withdraw a defamation suit filed by the attorney against respondent; and (10) respondent retaliated against attorneys who filed Bar complaints against him for his unethical conduct by asserting to their clients, government officials, politicians, the media, female lawyers in their law firm, employees, personal friends, acquaintances, and their wives, that the attorneys were criminal Case Nos. SC07-80 and SC07-354 Page Three pornographers who objectify women.

The Court concludes that the facts, as even more extensively detailed in the referee's report, support the referee's numerous recommendations as to guilt. The referee cited various cases indicating that disbarment is an appropriate sanction and recommended permanent disbarment because "[r]espondent has repeatedly stated in these proceedings that he will not change his conduct" and she "finds no evidence whatsoever to indicate that [r]espondent is amenable to rehabilitation, or even remotely appreciates the basis upon which a need or purpose for such rehabilitation is warranted." Indeed, as noted by the referee: Respondent has repeatedly failed to follow the appropriate rules and orders throughout these disciplinary proceedings as evidenced by the granting of the Bar's Motion for Sanctions and the Supreme Court of Florida's orders of February 19, 2008 and March 20, 2008, wherein the Court found that [r]espondent "abused the legal system by submitting numerous, frivolous and inappropriate filings," despite being warned not to do so. In fact, the referee reported that respondent walked out of her courtroom at the final hearing in this matter because she would not allow him to "to turn the [d]isciplinary proceeding into a press conference." Based on the record before it, the Court agrees that respondent is not amenable to rehabilitation. Further, the Court approves the referee's recommendation that permanent disbarment is the appropriate sanction.

The Court approves the corrected referee's report and John Bruce Thompson is permanently disbarred, effective thirty days from the date of this order so that respondent can close out his practice and protect the interests of existing clients. If respondent notifies the Court in writing that he is no longer practicing and does not need the thirty days to protect existing clients, this Court will enter an order making the permanent disbarment effective immediately. Respondent shall accept no new business from the date this order is filed. Judgment is entered for The Florida Bar, 651 East Jefferson Street, Tallahassee, Florida 32399-2300, for recovery of costs from John Bruce Thompson in the amount of $43,675.35, for which sum let execution issue. Case Nos. SC07-80 and SC07-354 Page Four Not final until time expires to file motion for rehearing, and if filed, determined. The filing of a motion for rehearing shall not alter the effective date of this permanent disbarment. Consistent with this Court's sanction order, no motion for rehearing will be considered unless signed by a member in good standing of The Florida Bar other than respondent. QUINCE, C.J., and WELLS, ANSTEAD, PARIENTE, LEWIS, BELL, and CANADY, JJ., concur. A True Copy Test: cic Served: HON. DAVA J. TUNIS, JUDGE JOHN F. HARKNESS, JR. KENNETH LAWRENCE MARVIN SHEILA MARIE TUMA BARRY S. RICHARD JOHN BRUCE THOMPSON

]]>
http://kotaku.com/index.php?op=postcommentfeed&postId=5054772&view=rss&microfeed=true