California Appeals Videogame Law to Supreme Court

[MrPop]

Maybe they should make the boxes like some cigarette boxes in the UK where they show a disgusting picture showing the consequences of selling games to people under-age >_> That's right I just compared under-age gaming to cigarettes...

I don't even see what the fuss is. I am (undoubtably) uninformed on this, but if they is not a law regarding ESRB ratings but only the shops policy on it then I would have thought making ESRB ratings legal wouldn't be a bad thing. It certainly wouldn't stop under-age gamers though.

You'd just ask one of your parents to buy it for you and it wouldn't have any adverse side-effects on you. Unless you are easily corrupted.

 

[Simriel]

Isnt it just fun how people still fail to recognise that most gamers are in fact NOT children?

 

[Royas]

By prohibiting the sale of violent video games to children under the age of 18 and requiring these games to be clearly labeled

Um... they already are. Have any of these people looked at a video game box before? The rating is right on the front. And legally people cannot sell games to people under the age of the ESRB rating.

Actually, there is nothing requiring any games to be rated, nor for them to display a rating. There isn't any law about selling M rated games to minors, either, any more than there is a law forbidding kids from going into R rated movies. It's all industry driven and industry enforced, usually pretty effectively too. Pretty much all major retailers belong to professional organizations that have requirements about displaying ratings and enforcing age limits.

I don't know if the Supreme Court will actually look at this (I give it a 50/50 shot) but I sure hope they decide against California again. It would set a very bad precedent if CA actually wins, and would likely spread to other forms of entertainment. I could easily see movie ratings being next. Idiots don't realize the system we have actually works, and it doesn't need fixing.

 

[Tech Team FTW!]

"The multi-billion dollar video game industry relies on the revenue generated by the sales of these extremely violent games to children"

Huh.
I hear PopCap is doing quite well, without the whole "revenue generated by the sale of these extremely violent games to children".

 

[HE3ED]

Im still not sure how the Schwarzenegger won the elections. Was their noone else running? Anyway, I think that this one will be shot down like Jack's attempt, but if this does get passed they will probably pass it in all the states seeing that California has been known to be a trend starter.

"California is facing a $21 billion budget shortfall coupled with high unemployment and home foreclosure rates. Rather than focus on these very real problems, Governor Schwarzenegger has recklessly decided to pursue wasteful, misguided and pointless litigation."

I feel that this is a low blow to the govenator, at least hes doing something more oiling his massive biceps.

 

[Sigenrecht]

Q.E.D.

 

[scotth266]

By prohibiting the sale of violent video games to children under the age of 18 and requiring these games to be clearly labeled

Um... they already are. Have any of these people looked at a video game box before? The rating is right on the front. And legally people cannot sell games to people under the age of the ESRB rating.

Being fair, they can legally sell M games to kids, but they aren't stupid enough to. It's store policy for basically every game retailer to follow the ESRB, but it isn't law.

It might as well be, seeing as how all the stores follow it lest they be lynched by the parenting mobs. In Walmart, the register lets out a warning squeal (as if you've stolen something) when a M-rated game is checked to alert the cashier to potential shenanigans.

I don't care really. I can buy the games myself now, so the retailers can go shove it, but this bill seems to be unecessary and wasteful. Does it do anything else besides making the sale of mature games to younguns illegal?

It's rather pointless: a kid can walk into a Border's and buy something far more sexually explicit and violent than a videogame. Yet they don't give books any dirty looks...

Probably because books aren't hip and trendy.

 

[DeadAccountMoveAlong]

"California is facing a $21 billion budget shortfall coupled with high unemployment and home foreclosure rates. Rather than focus on these very real problems, Governor Schwarzenegger has recklessly decided to pursue wasteful, misguided and pointless litigation."

By making this pathetic arguement, the ESA has enabled the conservatives to focus more on the issue. By saying "you have bigger problems to focus on, don't worry about us," it not only makes it appear as if the ESA is secretly sweating over a real concern, it makes them sound like total douches. You cannot pass the buck like this. If the tobacco industry took all the charges of selling cancer at inflated rates, and then said to the prosecuting party (we'll just assume it's some government official) "your administration sucks, give the homeless homes," people would be up in arms over the blatant attempt to not only avoid taking responsibility for the charges, but for the pathetic mudslinging attempt.

By saying "don't worry about us, fix your other problems," they have made it so the conservatives can much more easily label the situation as the ESA covering for something, and as a much bigger problem. This will lead to longer legal battles, which once hitting the Supreme Court will negatively impact the image of gaming and harm the industry, and meanwhile the same unemployed the ESA pretended to be martyrs for ("help the poor, then we can focus on the little issues") are increasing in numbers because they have only allowed for the video game industry to become a bigger distraction from the real problems.

In short, yes, it is misguided and pointless litigation. But by calling it such in such a perfect soundbite, it is only creating more misguided and pointless litigation.

 

[DeadAccountMoveAlong]

I'm pretty sure this calls for a bigger label on the box and bigger sanctions for people who sell the games to minors.

How about a video game box that has the name of the game and the rest of it is the rating. It would save on box art costs.

And sales would plummet, losing more money than is gained by avoiding the creation of box art. Why not make book covers the name of the book, and a list of all the mature things that happen in that book? The covers are a form of art, both in design and, more importantly, marketing. Look how much effort was put into the minimalistic Left 4 Dead cover that we all instantly recognize... there is a lot more to the image displayed than a picture pulled out of thin air minutes before releasing the game.
You're asking for censorship, which is probably the most disgusting invention of mankind.

 

[Valiance]

By prohibiting the sale of violent video games to children under the age of 18 and requiring these games to be clearly labeled

Um... they already are. Have any of these people looked at a video game box before? The rating is right on the front. And legally people cannot sell games to people under the age of the ESRB rating.

Vouched.

Though I was sold a couple M-Rated games when I was 16 and I was alone in the store...

 

[Frank_Sinatra_]

I'm pretty sure this calls for a bigger label on the box and bigger sanctions for people who sell the games to minors.

How about a video game box that has the name of the game and the rest of it is the rating. It would save on box art costs.

And sales would plummet, losing more money than is gained by avoiding the creation of box art. Why not make book covers the name of the book, and a list of all the mature things that happen in that book? The covers are a form of art, both in design and, more importantly, marketing. Look how much effort was put into the minimalistic Left 4 Dead cover that we all instantly recognize... there is a lot more to the image displayed than a picture pulled out of thin air minutes before releasing the game.
You're asking for censorship, which is probably the most disgusting invention of mankind.

And no offense but you apparently don't grasp the concept of sarcasm. I wrote that statement to show how ridiculous that idea that California had. If anyone is for the 1st Amendment it would be me, a college student studying JOURNALISM!
The government always pulls this kind of crap with video games and we need someone like me to take the idea that they had and blast it way out of proportion.
If anything the Californian government needs to go after companies like Game Stop not the ESA. It is not their responsibility and it isn't even Game Stops or similar companies responsibility. California should go after the parents who are being lazy and not PARENTING.

 

[cleverlymadeup]

By prohibiting the sale of violent video games to children under the age of 18 and requiring these games to be clearly labeled

Um... they already are. Have any of these people looked at a video game box before? The rating is right on the front. And legally people cannot sell games to people under the age of the ESRB rating.

like was said before it's not illegal, it's store policy not to sell the games to minors. they are trying to make it a law that it's illegal HOWEVER every time the law passes it gets tossed out by a court, much like this law was.

the funnier part about this is if the Supreme Court does hear the case and says "this law is invalid and violates free speech" then all the other attempts at laws will fail because of the precedent set by the Supreme Court, this is very dangerous for California to try cause it might backfire with very bad and possibly unintended consequences

 

[DeadAccountMoveAlong]

I'm pretty sure this calls for a bigger label on the box and bigger sanctions for people who sell the games to minors.

How about a video game box that has the name of the game and the rest of it is the rating. It would save on box art costs.

And sales would plummet, losing more money than is gained by avoiding the creation of box art. Why not make book covers the name of the book, and a list of all the mature things that happen in that book? The covers are a form of art, both in design and, more importantly, marketing. Look how much effort was put into the minimalistic Left 4 Dead cover that we all instantly recognize... there is a lot more to the image displayed than a picture pulled out of thin air minutes before releasing the game.
You're asking for censorship, which is probably the most disgusting invention of mankind.

And no offense but you apparently don't grasp the concept of sarcasm. I wrote that statement to show how ridiculous that idea that California had. If anyone is for the 1st Amendment it would be me, a college student studying JOURNALISM!
The government always pulls this kind of crap with video games and we need someone like me to take the idea that they had and blast it way out of proportion.
If anything the Californian government needs to go after companies like Game Stop not the ESA. It is not their responsibility and it isn't even Game Stops or similar companies responsibility. California should go after the parents who are being lazy and not PARENTING.

I'm sorry sport, but it was four in the morning. As a college student studying PSYCHOLOGY I know that my weird sleeping schedules dull my senses, and I shouldn't attempt to try to comprehend sarcasm when my insomnia is at its worst.
I like the spirit, though.

 

[Nuke_em_05]

Snip

Snip

Snip

Snip.

Snip.

Two things:

1) Even if the bill doesn't pass retailers still won't sell to minors because if they do they'll be ostracized by the rest of the industry like the one emo kid at a TF2 fan forum.

2) I'm naming my new Ultra-Gorefest Game "E: For Everyone" and putting the title in the upper right hand corner of the box.

So... case in point, fighting for this bill is a waste of resources for a state that is already low on resources. Government exists for regulation. The game industry is already self-regulating with the ERSB; game developers submit to it and retailers follow it. Those that don't... well, I can't think of any that don't, but that's probably because the consequences would be reputation suicide. So the resources could be better spent supporting the ERSB.

As I said before, making it a law wouldn't be a bad thing, but if it is requiring all this litigation and resources, it is not worth it to create redundant regulation.

 

[Pendragon9]

Hasta la Vista, game bill. *shoots grenade launcher*