Topic: A new low: Capcom tacitly condoning sexual harassment?

The article said that it was sponsored.

Sponsors pull support from people and organizations all the time. Why Capcom wouldn't pull support for this competition when this behavior reared its ugly head and the person/people responsible refused to realize they were in the wrong is absolutely beyond me. Their continued agreement to sponsor the competition supports this behavior, it shows the audience that it's okay to be a disgusting sexist pig because that's just how the gaming world works... and that's not right.

And I know there are other companies sponsoring the competition — MadCatz, for one — but Capcom was the biggest name I noticed there, and certainly the one I (had) trusted most, which is why as a female I feel particularly betrayed that they've condoned this kind of thing by not pulling their sponsorship. I've purchased so many Capcom games over the years, but I'll be damned if they ever get another dime of my money. I don't care if the next Phoenix Wright game is flippin' amazing and the bestest thing ever. I don't care if Layton vs. Wright ever hits NA shores, I will not be purchasing it.

don't worry, the localization is all Level 5 anyway.

It really depends on what kind of contract regarding the sponsorship Capcom has signed. Depending on the wording, it can be very, very difficult to pull sponsorship over something that is "potentially offensive" (well, offensive in every sense of the word, but America does have that pesky right to free speach to contend with).

There will usually be clauses in a sponsorship contract regarding the terms that it can be pulled out off. Assuming Capcom was silly enough to assume that video game ultra geeks would be on their best behaviour (and let's face it, Capcom makes stupid moves all the time), then it could have been incredibly costly (and with legal fees attached) to withdraw sponsorship in this instance.

Should they still have pulled sponsorship regardless? I would have, but on the pure basis that a sponsorship is a business, marketing, decision, and one that would have involved a legally-binding contract, Capcom may have had their hands tied here - we can't be certain it wasn't.

'potentially offensive' my foot — this. is. harassment. he was asked to stop and did not — flat-out refused, even, arguing on-air that he and every other male present had the right to make whatever sexual and racial jokes they wanted with the 'you know i'm just playin', baby, if you take me serious that's your problem' excuse. no, we don't know exactly what was signed and how, but there's no way they didn't have some sort of exit clause available. with as many lawyers as these companies employ, i refuse to believe they were that stupid as to sign away all of their rights for this competition.

Look, I would have cheered if someone punched the loser in the face for being a d-bag. If I was there, I would have floored him. The guy is the dictionary definition of a game geek loser, has an intolerable attitude and is everything that annoys me about people. He should never be on screen in the first place, regardless of his skill and mashing buttons.

There's a big difference between what is nasty, and what is the law, and all I'm saying is Capcom may or may not be complicit in all of this. If Capcom signed a contract to sponsor an event for $X dollars, and then decides that it doesn't want to sponsor the event any longer for any reason other than something the contract, or the law, allows it to do so for, then Capcom would be up for a seriously nasty bill/ court case.

Capcom should have been far more intelligent in what it sponsored, but pulling sponsorship isn't as easy as you'd suggest. Or perhaps it is and Capcom really is the ultimate scumbag company - I'm not defending them here, more pointing out that we just don't know enough right now.

Wait... does anyone know for absolute sure if they're just sponsoring it, or do they really have a hand in what's going on? this article here says they're 'collaborating' with iPlayWinner, Team Sp00ky, and 'working closely with' IGN to bring it to the masses. Even IGN's announcement article calls it 'Capcom's Cross Assault'. I like how they make it look like they own the place — up until the point where it's time to deny all association with remarks made by the players but let them keep doing their thing unchecked.
_{... and with that, i'm done for the night. gotta calm the rage so i can get some sleep D:}

there`s nothing wrong with freedom of speach. but i would have thought that there are laws prevent people from saying such derogatory remarks in public, regardlees of personal beliefs.
atleast one good thing has come from this. if that guy does get taken to court over his silly little rant, it`s caught on tape and he cannot deny any of his crude remarks.

imho "freedom of speech" should have a sister clause called "freedom to punch losers in their worthless faces."

Unfortunately, that would be abused as badly as freedom of speech is.

I'm sure there are some legal issues and Capcom opted to play it (arguably?) safe instead of doing the right thing. They could and should have said something more than that generic disclaimer though.

They need to do something fast to turn things around for them though, because they're losing big points with their fanbase.
_{just give me MH3G w/ online here dammit}