Cases involving race, gender, and religion are subject to what's called "strict scrutiny". Which means you'll get an essentially purely textual interpretation of a violation of statute.

Again, and I stress this, this is not a political issue, it is a legal issue. The virtue of the court is that it endures the madness of the times. Once a justice is on the bench, they're on for life, so public opinion means precisely dick to them. Their job is to interpret the law without passion or prejudice. 

There is a myriad of other things going on with an interpretation of the law beyond the specific statute such as interpretation, precedent, that pesky document called the Constitution.  Jerry Falwell tried this when Larry Flint issued a cartoon about Falwell having sex with his mom in an outhouse, and they even tried going that route claiming it was his mother who was harmed.  

If, for some crazy reason, it gets all the way to the Supreme Court you'd be lucky to get a 6-3 decision against Ubisoft, more than likely 7-2 or 8-1 (9-0 is usually reserved for going against personal approaches and consistency to law telling Congress "don't ever make a law like that again").  I can guarentee for sure Roberts, Thomas, Scalia,  Stevens, Kennedy, and Alito would vote against Ubisoft. There's a 5-4 just going purely on cases prior of this nature and approaches to interpreting the law.

The general public would probably consider it more vile, being that it's so sexually repressed here, but thankfully the general public has no say on the interpretation of a law.  We leave that up to the professionals, and let them do their job without having to worry about elections and public opinion. 

I did not know that the spoken and written word were adjudicated differently. My mistake.

I shared the link for three reasons. The first is painfully obvious it was relevant to the discussion, and it was informative to fellow posters. The second was the material was difficult for me to find so in all likelihood it would be difficult for others. I was being helpful. The third reason for a link is that it acts as a velvet curtain, and does not result in a lurid account. I doubt anyone wanted to read a blow by blow recount of the comic.

Before anyone labels me as particularly heinous or as a deviant. You have to confess to yourself you knew full and well that what was beyond that link might be offensive. You decided to look anyway either for edification, gratification, or self stimulation. Personally I thought the comic was well done, and if you were receptive you would find much to comment on.

I hardly held a gun to anyones head, and the comic was relevant since it was the primary ingredient in a evolving story. You had a choice to avoid the comic, but I think once people were informed they did start to formulate much more then generic opinions.

Legally the company is just using scare tactics. Trying to muzzle contrary opinion. I think most of us realize not only is it childish but futile. The Internet has a long memory, and once the genie is out of the bottle its out for good. The offensive material can cross international borders in seconds, and much of those locations that the material will find purchase in are legal backwaters. Even prosecuting the artist would bring no relief. All that would do is create a martyr.

You can actually ignore all legal ramifications. They are technically meaningless, and in the end even if it were prohibited by law they would have no hope of enforcement. I actually think this is an example of a corporate blunder. A far better result would have been accomplished through simple courtesy. How hard is it to politely ask someone to take down offensive material.

I guarantee that if they had asked nicely for sites to pull down the comic they would have probably gotten a positive result. The comics would have probably come down. They would have appeared mature and affable. Instead now they have people potential customers no less hating them, and hating on their product. The righteous saving the material from the evil censor, and the comic will recur on the web for years to come.

They did what so many companies do best. They took a small problem, and instead of trying to turn it into a positive. They instead decided to pour gasoline on top of it and light a match. Offensive comics come out every day all over the world. The overwhelming majority of them are forgotten, but how many of us are going to forget this one.

How ever did these people get anywhere in life. What happened to that small word please. Why is their first thought to threaten someone. Thats the kind of behavior you expect from a playground bully. Well bullies are not know for being terribly bright.

Well said Dodece, you have a beautiful way of puting things.

How unbelievably low-class that comic artist is.

This is why video games are never taken seriously as an artform. The street prophets and commentators are sexually-frustrated 15-year-old boys who happen to be in their late 20's.

What the fuck happened to my hobby?  I am ashamed to refer to myself as a gamer.

EDIT: May I take a step back an ask a question? Who the hell are we? This is over a VIDEO GAME. A TOY, basically. For the actions of a PR firm, or for the unfulfilled wishes of customers and reviewers, an otherwise UNRELATED talented young female professional is slandered by having her character impeached. For what? What did she ever do to deserve this? I don't even like Assassin's Creed. I don't even own a 360 or a PS3. But this is unconscionable.

Maybe because I was brought up to treat women with the utmost respect, but this irks me in ways I never thought the internet could. Kee-rist. What is wrong with these guys?

Maybe I shouldn't be surprised. To paraphrase a rather obscure Law and Order episode:

Japanese Business Man: Today our company opened a new car factory in town. 6,000 new jobs! This afternoon somebody threw paint on my car. It was disturbing... but expected.

If this truly bothers you, I can only surmise that you have not been around on the internet for very long or explored its darkest corridors. I'm sorry, but the internet is not a happy place filled with sunshine and adorable bunnies. It is a dark and scary place much akin to a haunted, zombie and demon filled Alcatraz. It will gleefully laugh as it joyously rips apart all good sentiments you possess in regards to human nature and moral/ethical values. It will dance on their shreds and it will make you cry. You will face the dogs. You will face the bees. And you will also face the dogs with bees in their mouth so that when they bark they shoot bees. In order to successfully cope with the internet, you must become stronger as a person. That is not easy. However, rest assured that we have the technology. We can rebuild your childhood dreams and we can put them back to the way that they were. Then the internet will shatter them again.

You may as well just set your homepage to a 403 error page and pleasantly go about your life blissfully ignorant of the true horrors of the internet. Your everlasting soul will surely thank you and you will never again have to be subjected to the horrors of such a comic.

...

Now, I must be off lest the internet zombies catch me.