Outspoken Florida attorney Jack Thompson, whose legal crusades against violent and sexually explicit videogames and the organization that regulates them has garnered more and more media attention, is back in the public eye. This time Thompson is petitioning the Entertainment Software Rating Board (ESRB) to change its M (Mature) rating to an AO (Adults Only) rating for Capcom's Killer 7 , a stylized psycho-thriller for Nintendo GameCube and Sony PlayStation 2.

The ESRB evaluates and assigns videogames ratings based on their content. A game suitable for all ages will likely receive an E for Everyone while titles with stronger themes and violence will probably fall under the M umbrella, which caters to the 17 years-old and up crowd. The AO rating was created to recognize games developed specifically for gamers 18 years-old and up. Games not rated by the ESRB go ignored by major retail chains across the United States, which is why most publishers work with the organization.

Thompson recently sent an e-mail to Patricia Vance, president of the ESRB, explaining his position. He also forwarded the e-mail to media and various government officials, including Senator Hilary Clinton and Senator Joseph Lieberman, both of whom have been outspoken critics against sex and violence in videogames.

Killer 7, released by Capcom on July 7, challenges players to become seven deadly assassins. The game, which was developed out of Japan, features stylized cel-shaded graphics and a story drowned in adult themes, spoken profanity, violence, and sexual situations. The game was rated M by the ESRB for "blood and gore, intense violence, sexual themes and strong language."

In the e-mail, Thompson cites IGN.com's review of Killer 7 and its description of "full-blown sex sequences" as a primary reason why the game should receive an AO rating. Major retailers including Wal-Mart do not sell AO-rated games, which would mean that such a rating might have an adverse impact on sales of Killer 7.

"There is no question in my mind that a videogame containing 'full-blown sex sequences' cannot be rated anything other than 'AO' rather than 'M,'" Thompson writes in the e-mail. "The [IGN.com review] says that this game's 'M' actually means something, and [it] says it twice for emphasis."

Thompson has for years campaigned against the ESRB's rating system, which he believes is ineffective. In fact, he has publicly called for the Entertainment Software Association (ESA), which governs over the ESRB, to upend its president Doug Lowenstein, describing the executive as a "thug" who "...never met a pixelated prostitute he didn't like." These comments came in response to the ESRB's initial M-rating for the notoriously violent and profane action series, Grand Theft Auto. Thompson's side has gained high-up supporters ever since the ESRB failed to catch a hack in Grand Theft Auto: San Andrea dubbed the "Hot Coffee Mod" that unlocks inappropriate sexual content.

Elaborating in his e-mail to Ms. Vance, Thompson writes: "There are those who would say that people such as I are 'prudes' who have no problem with violence but get uptight about sexual content in games. That is a disingenuous charge, and you know why. I have been on national television programs, as early as the week before Columbine, complaining about 13-year-olds being enabled by the ESRB to violent 'M' games. But it is your sister organization, the Entertainment Software Association, that is in court right this second in Illinois trying to prevent the extension of the 'sex' argument to the 'violence' argument. It is your industry, then, that thinks violence is okay for kids but that sex, given state laws already on the books, is not okay.

"Well, the Killer 7 game underscores the fact that your organization and the industry it fronts for appear to try to get away with anything that is harmful to kids, whether already illegal or not. What it also means is that if jurors in a criminal prosecution were asked whether Killer 7 contains 'sexual material harmful to minors' in violation of statutory standards, then, based upon the above enthusiastic review at IGN.com, the answer to that question would probably be 'yes.'

"That answer would put the Entertainment Software Rating Board, in my opinion, in the middle of a criminal conspiracy to distribute sexual material harmful to minors in violation of criminal statutes. This is not a situation in which the ESRB has been blind-sided by hidden or embedded content, Ms. Vance. You all have known that the 'full-blown sex sequences' are patently present in the game, yet you chose to put an 'M' rather than an 'AO' rating on it. Big mistake.

"If I were you, Ms. Vance, I would immediately ask the makers of this game, and all retailers, to pull it from store shelves. If you don't, expect for others to use this latest scandal, which I am hereby officially kicking off, to call for a dismantling of the ESRB. The fox has guarded the chickens long enough. Killer 7 seems to prove it."

Thompson's campaign seems based solely on the description of Killer 7 in the IGN.com review -- a description that is open to interpretation. In fact, Killer 7's so-called "full-blown sex sequences" could appear tame when compared to those in some of today's movies. The sexual scenes in question showcase a fully clothed wheelchair-bound man pleasuring a straddling woman, who is also fully clothed. Although she moans, indicating a sexual orgasm, neither nudity nor intercourse is illustrated in the cut-scene. The same scene in a movie today might warrant only a PG-13 or, worst, R-rating.

Which raises another issue: are videogames and movies being judged by the same standards or is explicit content in software being scrutinized simply for being so drastically different from the days when Pac-Man reigned supreme?

The ESRB argues that its rating system has established laws and guidelines to regulate the sale of suitable software to consumers, and Senator Joseph Lieberman agrees. He has called the ESRB the most comprehensive of any entertainment ratings system.

IGN contacted Capcom Entertainment for further comment, but the company had none.

E-mails to the ESRB were not answered before publish time.

Stay tuned for more on the story as it breaks.